A New Look at the Federal Suit Against Arizona’s Immigration Law
More recently, Rhode Island state police started checking the immigration status of people stopped for traffic violations. They reported all illegal aliens to federal authorities for deportation. The federal appellate court rejected arguments that the state action was unconstitutional, in Estrada v. Rhode Island (Feb. 2010). The court relied on Mena.
It gets more complicated. In 2004, the International Court of Justice ruled that the United States violated the Vienna Convention when state police did not inform Medellin and 50 other Mexican nationals about their Vienna Convention rights to have their consulates notified of their arrest. The police cannot give that information unless they ask the people arrested if they are aliens. Arizona could interpret the federal court ruling as requiring it to violate the Vienna Convention by not asking arrestees if they are aliens who have rights under the Vienna Convention.
The final complexity: some cities are saying that they will refuse to do business with Arizona unless it changes its law. In 1976, a Mississippi statute forbade buying milk from states that had milk health laws that (Mississippi said) were unfair. The unanimous Supreme Court held that this state law violated the Commerce Clause. If Mississippi thought that the other state’s law was unfair, it should sue, not create a trade barrier. A city law that limits commerce with Arizona because of its alien laws may be different, but that is yet another issue that the Court will have to decide.
The question on how to deal with illegal immigration is an emotional one for many people. Some call for mass deportations, but that should not happen: mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy. We are also a litigious democracy, so we will have lawsuits. There is a simpler way: Congress can turn its attention to enacting legislation to deal with these issues directly instead of relying on lower courts (and eventually the Supreme Court) to interpret the sounds of Congressional silence.
In your last paragraph you state that mass deportations are typical symbols of dictatorship, not of democracy.
My question would be, what are rules and regulations of that person’s country and I did not know we were a democracy but a Republic.
There is no reason in this world why the Federal Government should be suing the State of Arizona, none at all. If the Justice Department is doing this under the orders of Obama simply to obtain support from Obama’s liberal base, then this man-child of a president of ours is sadly mistaken. Also, many Latinos that are here LEGALLY should be upset that the Federal Government, through the use of sanctuary cities, is trying to allow illegal aliens to simply come into this country and work whenever and wherever they want to. And you just know that the Democrats are going to try to give illegal aliens the right to have a drivers license and the right to vote, even though they are NOT American citizens.
Sometimes I think Washington has just gone insane and they desperately need an intervention. Hopefully, this November will be the intervention they so desperately need.
The real insanity is all the CBC, NAACP, SCLC, ACLU… members along with the Sharptons and Jerksons….siding against the Arizona laws and for…FOR the Illegals!!
With black unemployment around 25 to 30% ther last time I looked…..why the hell would they support illegals taking jobs from blacks? Further pushing them down into permanent dependency and economic doom?
Why aren’t they throwing bones at their “messiah” who clearly is totally disassociated from reality regrading black unemployment.
If mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship why are not massive illegal immigrant importations considered to be the same thing?
When bureaucrats, profit takers, politicians and lawmakers collude to ignore the law and overpower the will of the people isn’t that actually living under a dictatorship?
“mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy” – like Eisenhower’s “Operation Wetback” in 1954? Overgeneralize much? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback
The United States of America is the property of its citizens, and as such the citizens reserve the right to determine which non-citizens, if any, should be present on the American’s property. Should a non-property owner be found undesirable they have no natural right to trespass on the property of others, and they should be ejected without moral qualm. The vast majority of Americans want illegal aliens gone from our country, and we’re going to change our politicians until we get some that have the spine to do the job.
Instead of “dictatorship” it could also be a symbol of “draconian” measures to actually enforce the immigration laws as written by congress. Do you really mean to argue or imply that an elected legislative body is a dictatorship when no future elections have been ended or when the right to judicial review has not been suspended? The last I looked, only congress has the power to suspend the right to judicial review and declare martial law, so I suppose that makes Lincoln the first and last American dictator–in so far that he suspended the courts, locked up people for the duration of the war without judicial review, or took private property (“freeing the slaves”) by executive fiat rather than through judicial or congressional authorization. Maybe that progressive FDR comes close with his mass interment of Japanese Americans in concentration camps during WW2, which was approved by the Supreme Court.
“The last I looked, only congress has the power to suspend the right to judicial review and declare martial law,” Not so… thanks to the Clinton administration, it only takes a stroke of the executive pen.
I’m just waiting for this Congress and White House, to legislate local police to stay out of blighted neighborhoods because their presence indicates ‘racial profiling’.
We are witnessing the complete breakdown, and legislation against common sense.
If “mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship”, how would you characterize selective and deliberate violations of Federal law?
At what point do the States have an obligation to protect their citizens from over-reaching encroachment by the Feds, while these same Federal offices choose to ignore aspects of their Constitutional mandate which they find politically uncomfortable?
Let us not forget that most Supreme Court decisions are built not upon the Constitution, but rather upon previous decisions — right or wrong. Clearly not the best method in my opinion.
Why do we bother to refer to these people as “illegal aliens” if we will not enforce the legal issues. Perhaps a phrase like “Naturalizationally Challenged” or “Impending Future Democratic Voter” will catch on.
//sarc on
Being called an “illegal alien” must make them feel bad as well. We should stop that.
//sarc off
…yes notice the increased UFO sightings as of late?
//sarc lock
…explains the increase in UFO activity of late!
Steve, According to our esteemed State Attoney General here in Massachsetts (You know, the one who lost to Scott Brown because she didn’t realize she needed to actually campaign for the job of Senator), “It’s technically not illegal to be illegal in Massachusetts.”
Yes, she actually said that.
I’ll give you three guesses what letter follows her name, and the first two don’t count.
“Some call for mass deportations, but that should not happen: mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy.”
The above statement is incorrect. Eisenhower deported at least hundreds of thousands in the early 1950′s and we still don’t live in a dictatorship. Second, we live in a Republic, not a Democracy. This is supposed to be a nation of laws and when people violate laws there a consequences. Mass deportation of illegal aliens is both legal and moral. We have no moral responsibility to any illegal alien or for that matter any foreign “poor person”. A nation has responsibility to it’s citizens and allies, and not the world in general.
Agreed.
Wonderfully said!!!
Naturalization and immigration are NOT the same thing! The Constitution grants the power to provide uniform rules of naturalization, that is, the process whereby an alien becomes a naturalized citizen. It says nothing about immigration, which is the flow of persons into a state. Since all powers not delegated to the federal government are retained by the states and the people per the 10th Amendment, can that not be interpreted to mean that regulating immigration is a duty of the states?
Perhaps we should have the federal government publish a list of the laws they do not intend to enforce. Like immigration laws, federal election laws, federal campaign finance laws, the exclusion of labor unions from prosecution under RICO statutes, the exemption of tax law enforcement against members of Congress, or the exclusion of hate crimes against non-blacks.
Really, it would make things so much easier to understand. I’m sure most of us would appreciate a bit of legal clarity.
Everyone is talking about a last paragraph about “mass deportations”. Was it edited out or is my browser broken? Am I not getting the whole article?
…look for page 2 at the bottom.
Ya had me till you showed your retardation with this
“Some call for mass deportations, but that should not happen: mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy.”
Justifying breaking the law is retarded. Rewarding lawbreakers is retarded. You are retarded.
J Milam, It’s a 2 page article.
The author chose his words poorly.
This is NOT a democracy, which is rule by direct plebicite, or by the mob. We are a Republic.
Mass deportation has been done three times in the 20th century, and a dictatorship did not result. Draconian is a better word for the action.
Defending the border with armies is not a sign of dictatorship. That is the historically recognized manner of defending same.
It’s a shame he ended on such an imprecision, as the rest of the article was enlightening. The pratfall at then end, a product of pure opinion, leads me to question his credibility in the preceding paragraphs.
Under the Constitution, EVERY STATE RETAINS THE RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE, EVEN TO THE POINT OF ENGAGING IN WAR.
According to Article I Section 10 paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, … engage in War, UNLESS actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.” [emphasis added]
What’s more, according to Article IV Section 4: “The United States… shall protect [every State] against Invasion…”.
So then, to me the essential Constitutional question that the courts have to answer regarding Arizona is this:
Q: Has Arizona been “actually invaded” and or is Arizona “in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay” within the meaning of the Constitution and, if so, has the United States sufficiently fulfilled its Constitutionally-mandated duty to “protect [Arizona] against Invasion”?
I think the answer to my Constitutional question is obvious – don’t you?
No question
‘..mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy.”
What utter hogwash and nonsense. Mass deportation of ILLEGAL immigrants is simply enforcement of laws passed in a democracy. It is simple enforcement of just laws.
Mass deportation of LEGAL residents for discriminatory reasons would be symbolic of a dictatorship. No one is advocating that in the US.
EXACTLY!!!
THE SHOW ME STATE KNOWS HOW IT IS DONE!!!
Barry and holder are not concerned with Missouri…. EVEN THOUGH THEIR LAWS ARE MORE STRICT THAN SB 1070…. BECAUSE THERE ARE NO ILLEGAL VOTES TO GARNER!!!!! Arizona? Lots of potential votes!!
PROOF OF MOTIF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why Missouri has NO illegal Aliens!!!
Let’s all contact our state representatives and
get going in this direction! Seems like this system is working!
Interesting: Missouri ‘s approach to the problem
of illegal immigration appears to be more advanced, sophisticated,
strict and effective than anything to date in Arizona . Do the loonies
in San Francisco , or the White House, appreciate what Missouri has
done? When are our fearless President and his dynamic Attorney General
going to take action to require Missouri start accepting illegal
immigrants once again?
So, why doesn’t Missouri receive attention?
Answer: There are no Mexican illegals in Missouri to
demonstrate.
The “Show Me” state has once again showed us how it
should be done.
There needs to be more publicity and exposure regarding
what Missouri has done.
Let’s pass it around.
In 2007, Missouri placed on the ballot a proposed
constitutional amendment designating English as the official language
of Missouri . In November, 2008, nearly 90% voting in favor! Thus
English became the official language for ALL governmental activity in
Missouri .
No individual has the right to demand government
services in a language OTHER than English.
In 2008 a measure was passed that required the Missouri
Highway Patrol and other law enforcement officials to verify the
immigration status of any person arrested, and inform federal
authorities if the person is found to be in Missouri illegally.
Missouri law enforcement offices receive specific training with respect
to enforcement of federal immigration laws.
In Missouri illegal immigrants do NOT have access to
taxpayers benefits such as food stamps and health care through Missouri
HealthNET. In 2009 a measure was passed that ensures Missouri ‘s public
institutions of higher education do NOT award financial aid to
individuals who are illegally in the United States .
In Missouri all post-secondary institutions of higher
education to annually certify to the Missouri Dept. of Higher Education
that they have NOT knowingly awarded financial aid to students who are
unlawfully present in the United States.
So while Arizona has made national news for its new law,
it is important to remember Missouri has been far more proactive in
addressing this horrific problem.
Missouri has made it clear that illegal immigrants are
NOT welcome in the state and they will certainly NOT receive public
benefits at the expense of Missouri taxpayers!
All good points. Thanks for the info.
Your quite welcome…
semper fi
Duke
Only an unethical lawyer could allow him/herself to claim that Arizona’s law is unconstitutional. However, the Justice Deparment and AG Eric Holder are up to their “asses” in corrupt practices.
The AG and Justice Department aren’t concerned with the constitution.
Mass deportations? Sorry that’s not what people opposed to amnesty are advocating. Nice try to mislead your readers though. What IS supported by true anti-amnesty conservatives is attrition through enforcement, not rounding up millions of illegals and shipping them home so they can just do it all over again. I hate to say it, but this looks like yet another attempt by “conservatives” to pander to Hispanics, who by the way have larger and more varied concerns than immigration. How insulting to legal Hispanics and native Hispanic U.S. citizens to be constantly told by both Democrats and allegedly socailly “conservative” Republicans that Hispanics’ #1 issue is support for illegal immigration? How much more naive can you be? I agree with comment #14. I am always suspicious of so-called “conservatives” who are sympathetic to the pro-amnesty side and who turn a naive, blind eye to the dangers and overwhelmingly draining net cost to which rampant illegal immigration subjects U.S. citizens. Immigration is NOT an “emotional” issue and it is not limited to only Hispanics. There are people of all backgrounds who come to the U.S. illegally. It is a political issue that can be remedied with common sense, not “feelings.” Enough is enough – GO ARIZONA! 3/4 of the nation is on your side!
PS – “Press One for English: The Movie” http://pressoneforenglishthemovie.com/
“What IS supported by true anti-amnesty conservatives is attrition through enforcement, not rounding up millions of illegals and shipping them home so they can just do it all over again.” Whats the differ? Rounding up millions of illegals WOULD BE attrition through enforcement. “shipping them home so they can just do it all over again”? Now there’s the problem… the do it all over again part. Catching the flames don’t stop the fire. Most Hispanics I talk to… say they don’t like illegal immigrants either. But they mostly speak english too.
Yep…Go Jan Brewer, Joe and AZ.
I agree with you, Go AZ.
The availability of jobs and government benefits as well as the anchor-baby policy are the great magnets that attract most illegals, while non-enforcement of the borders is the means by which illegals acquire the jobs, the benefits and the anchor-baby status. The 3-part solution then is to cut off the access to jobs, to tighten up the leaky borders and to end anchor-baby status — attrition will then kick in and most illegals will self-deport.
…In a new, unreported ‘twist’, the illegal immigrants are subverting the 14th amendment as it is…. Being ‘intouch’ with more than just a few hispanic Americans that reside in Arizona… I have learned a couple of things, 1st they hate the illegal’s which they call ‘bandittos’ or bandits and criminals. 2nd… what they are doing is, birthing children in Mexico, and then running across the border with their newborn and claiming the birth occurred on American soil to gain citizenship…via a false ‘anchor’ baby. These are not my assumptions, AS EVIDENCED BY THE ‘PILES’ OF NEWBORN ‘SIZED’ BABY DIAPERS STREWN ALONG THE U.S. SIDE OF THE BORDER…. but statements from legal Mexican Americans living in Arizona!
The States, including Arizona, have a measure of discretion under the Constitution regarding the admission of Persons allowed to migrate or to be imported into that State.
According to Article I Section 9 paragraph 1 of the U.S. Constitution: “ The Migration or Importation of such Persons AS ANY OF THE STATES NOW EXISTING SHALL THINK PROPER TO ADMIT, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight…”. [emphasis added] – the language of this provision clearly contemplates States having some discretion regarding migration, importation and admission of Persons.
Nor is this Constitutional measure of discretion limited only to “the states now existing” as of the ratification of Article I Section 9, because the Supreme Court has long ago established the so-called ‘Doctrine of the Equality of States’: ”Equality of constitutional right and power is the condition of all the States of the Union, old and new.” See, Escanaba Co. v. Chicago, 107 U.S. 678, 689 (1883).
So then the Constitutional question in my view becomes this:
Q: Has the discretion that Arizona, consistent with Article I Section 9 paragraph 1, has to determine “the Migration or Importation of …Persons” it deems “proper to admit” been “prohibited by the Congress”?
If Congress HAS so prohibited such migration or importation of Persons into Arizona, then Arizona has a right to rely upon that prohibition by Congress.
And if Congress has NOT so prohibited such migration or importation of Persons into Arizona, then Arizona has a right to exercise its OWN discretion to prohibit such migration or importation of Persons into the State.
Nor does the 14th Amendment help the illegal alien in this regard because, even though an illegal alien may be a “Person” entitled to due process and equal protection under that provision, they are nevertheless expressly DENIED “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” by that same provision which defines “citizens” as “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof”.
It is a Constitutional “privilege … of citizens of the United States” to enjoy the right of largely unrestricted travel within the United States – illegal aliens do NOT enjoy that same Constitutional privilege.
Mass deportations of citizens and other legal residents is a sign of a dictatorship. Mass neglect of the presence of millions of illegal residents is the sign of a a government that has abrogated its responsibilities. Mass deportations of illegal aliens to remedy the fault is the sign of a constitutional republic that has resumed abiding by the rule of law.
“We can do so if we create a safer border, a border that will unite us instead of dividing us, uniting our people,” CALDEON said in a press conference with OBAMA. “We can do so with a community that will promote a dignified life in an orderly way for both our countries.”
What the hell does that mean????
Say there “RR” Your quote “mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy. We are also a litigious democracy, so we will have lawsuits.” … Writing as you are for a national pub can you at least get the definitions correct. We, U.S. are a Republic not a Democracy. We adhere (most of the time) to Democratic principles, but we are a Republic. Therefore at some point the congress will have to, in one of its infrequent “SANE” moments fix this situation once and for all. But that will be after we in Arizona have had our day with the supremes. Altogether an interesting article.
I will give Professor Rotunda an A for effort with his earnest post – but once the full review is in – his overall grade quickly deflates to a very pedestrian C. About average for any academic wadding into the muddy waters of immigration.
As many fellow posters have noted there is one particularly dismissive assertion that most here object to, as do I. Why would stepping up deporations move us in any way toward a despotic nation? Because the communist vietamese did it in the late seventies? (actually people fled to avoid being executed more than offically being deported in a systematic way) Or because Castro emulated it in a similar way in the eighties (without nearly as much blood shed)?
Obama and his 1st mate Napolitano – a dope of a pol chosen particularly because of her media standing as a so called experienced border state Gov perceived as a moderate on immigration – have both fended off accusations of not doing enough to secure the border by tossing back the factual claim that deporations of CRIMINAL aliens – that is those who have robbed, raped, killed or otherwise ventured off into gangland territory – have been deported at twice the numbers under Bush – both in ’09 and now in ’10.
{although they never mention that trying them here and imprisoning them here is a lot more expensive – as most western states – particularly California – can attest. Ask them what happens to them in mexico or which ever country takes them back. Most often they are not extridited to be tried – but deported to freedom…all the more disgusting}
What they have also done is simultaneously drop the deporation of those who haven’t ventured off into criminal activity other than coming here to work – INCLUDING IDENTITY THEFT.
JD Hayworth said it best in his ill-fated run against McShamnesty; They see the border and its issues as a political problem to be managed…[I see] it as a national security issue to be solved…
I’ve seen this routine under Janet Napolitano first hand during her governorship – promoting illegal immigration as an ultimately good thing – and couching this support in terms of civil and human rights; it’s been a disaster in Arizona. It has directly undermined what she claimed was her first and most important goal when governor – to diversify AZ’s economy and make AZ a desired destination for the best jobs/corporations.
That is a description of TEXAS today. Under any meaningful catagory outlinging the priorities to make us a great place to do business – where once we were #2 or at worst #5 IN EVERY IMPORTANT WAY – she inherited a state with successive conservative Republican Gov’s and Legislatures that had steadly lifted the standard of living, wages, everything – and reversed it to it’s lowest standing twenty years before she eeked into office by a few thousand votes.
What she did do was promote a tripling of latino immigration – most of it illegal. And starting almost as soon as she came to office in ’02 we had popular referrendums pushing back what her policies were encouraging – on everything from employer sanctions to Voter ID to Bail for those arrested (for ‘serious crimes’ or just loitering while BEING HERE) to the legality of banks offering mortgages, checking accounts, auto loans and credit cards.
She tried to sell her ‘vision’ much the same way Obama has – it’s about ‘growth’ & ‘diversity’, about the promise of America, about all these really important things that will ensure America continues being a great ecomomic world power.
And it was all a load of bunk. It’s opportunistic politcs pure and simple.
So it was in Phoenix when Napolitano was in charge it now is in Washington where she is shilling for Obama. It is not about what is best for America. It is about what is best for THEM AS DEMOCRATS. And what is best for them as Democrats is following the California model as it has unfolded since 1992.
To take what was once a great conservative stronghold cultivated under the leadership of Goldwater and transform it into a Democratic party stronghold – where [they believe] one party Dem rule will proceed for the next generation – as it has in California.
You don’t do that buy enforcing existing immigration law. You do it by turning the existing law on it’s head through non-enforcement. While it is particularly infuriating for conservatives it is not particularly complex.
So it is really insulting to here the good Professor couple deporation as a unworkable and unreasonable effort and then go so far as to claim it as despotism.
Life in Arizona under Napolitano was as close to despotism as I hope this country ever gets. She played out her routine along the former Cali Jimmy Carter Democrate GRAY DAVIS’ playbook. Build government (she did it at 10% a year) and then use those ‘jobs created’ as a base to do more of the same. Even during the best years of the early post 9/11 economy the two most reliable growth industries was gov jobs and health care – health care being HER BIGGEST GOV GROWTH. #3? – Public Universities.
Sound familar?
At least with Gov Jan Brewer I have an executive who clearly recognizes the absurdity of Rotunda’s claim. Just as it was once absurd of Napolitano to insist that securing the border was impossible because ‘build a twenty foot wall and they will use a 22-ft ladder’.
Secondly, interjecting the validitiy of ’2004 International Court of Justice’ complication is a smoke screen of bull as well. I didn’t like it when the Mexican President started spouting off about not approving of SB1070 and all that, and I resented it even more when democrats at that congressional gathering applauded the prick, but there is a big difference between this kind of symbolic give and take in public and legal issues of soverignty.
Congress invited the dolt and he made his statement.
Again I return to the example of the boat people who came during Carters term. WE OWED MANY SOMETHING. They were being slaughtered after we failed to win in Vietnam – it was a mess we created.
Then Castro exploited the same problems this immigration wave presented later – dumping everyone from political undesirables to savage criminals to the serverly disabled.
The political will – a guilty pleasure too many Republicans are likewise distracted by but a cannard to which the Democrats are virtually OBSESSED – is about gaining voters – tens of millions in one dramatic swoop.
The ‘complexity’ arguments have been pounded into the ground for years now. NO SIR IT IS NOT COMPLEX. It is really simple you stupid silly mongoose of a intellectual boob.
It is about we the people electing officials who enact our desires on this. And the public from Phoenix to Alaska to Maine and all parts inbewteen have been very clear – in the support of us with SB1070 and various similar popular referrendums passed and struck down in court or otherwise.
If you think it’s complicated then don’t get into politics because ain’t got a future there – you dig? There isn’t a debate except among goofs in the media. The debate ended years ago. Don’t come illegally BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT WELCOME – you plain and simple are not wanted. We the people want to invite who we want to invite (be it HB1 or some such program)and who we want invited get invited ON OUR TERMS….as in employers pay the freight.
No it’s not complicated. It can be done…and it WILL BE. Just listen to that Tea Kettle blowin….
The Obama administrations assault on Arizona
You said a mouthful, Phoenix48 — all of which I pretty much agree with.
We have got , not just mexican illegals coming across the border… but Islamic terrorists from Pakistan, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan…. pouring through!! ..and the ex-governor of Arizona.. Janet Napolitono, now our homeland security chief, is not only fully aware of it.. but, allows it to go unchecked.
While I’m on the subject… Do you know that while governor, she sent invoices ‘bills’… for millions of dollars, to the Federal Government, to recoup losses the state incurred for incarceration, medical expenses and a host of other ‘costs’ … stating that the government is negligent in it’s Constitutional duties to protect the state of Arizona from illegal immigrants crossing her border? …AND she knows the Arizona law, as written … is a virtual duplicate of the federal law. So how the hell would she, could she.. along with holder.. and the obamination… have a problem with its constitutionality… in regards to racial discrimination???? Are the fed laws that have been ‘hammered out’ in the courts by the ACLU … unconstitutional too?
So why are ‘they’ making statements, they know to be false… to ‘stir-up’ the 30 million illegal immigrants that have slipped through already? Hmmm…
“The question on how to deal with illegal immigration is an emotional one for many people. Some call for mass deportations, but that should not happen: mass deportations are a typical symbol of dictatorship, not of democracy.”
Making an emotional statement after saying the issue is an emotional one is just chasing your own tail. First, we only have the writer’s word that mass deportation is equated with dictatorship. Lack of examples or cited source! Second, dictatorships tend to keep people IN, not OUT!! You know? Iron Curtains? Barbed wire and machine gun patrols? Third, mass deportations are not normally regular occurrences in any sort of government. It is normally a response to massive problems involving immigrants which have gone unaddressed for decades. You just don’t have a sudden need for mass deportations arising overnight, or even in a few months. It takes years of neglect and inaction, and a porous border, first.
That having been said, the American people aren’t idiots. We’re just fed up with the “Americans are too lazy to do the work” mentality we hear coming from the people who appear too lazy to perform their own jobs! ICE has repeatedly stated that they will not accept illegal alien referrals from the states, while the DoJ is suing Arizona for having the nerve to try to do SOMETHING about the situation, while Americans are suffering, dying, AND paying the bill for it! Enough anger, and “deport ‘em all!” starts sounding like REASON, especially in comparison to, for example, the DREAM Act, where young adults children of illegal immigrants are slated to be rewarded for their parents’ violation of the law.
No, we can’t deport ‘em all, and do so in compliance with due process, habeus corpus and all other civil rights. So…do nothing???
I tend to agree with the core subject of this article. Yes, getting favorable precedents established will help, but not necessarily overcome, the Arizona lawsuit, and even willing a total victory in court is meaningless if the Feds don’t make an effort to enforce illegal migration law. There can be no victory, nor even an improvement, until we no longer have a Liberal in the White House, who considers the rights of illegal residents to be superior to those of legal residents and citizens.
Vince –
While I agree with the general tenor of your comment, I strongly take issue when you say that: “No, we can’t deport ‘em all, and do so in compliance with due process, habeus corpus and all other civil rights.”
1. “Due process” is NOT a one-size-fits-all concept. The nature and the extent of process that is “due” in one circumstance is not identical to the nature and the extent of process that is “due” in every other circumstance. Basic procedural due process just involves the elements of having notice and an opportunity to be heard. Illegal aliens are on notice that they are violating the law and a minimal hearing is all they are entitled to before we “deport ‘em all”. Substantive due process on the other hand is a squishy concept that is disfavored in law because it lacks sufficient standards to be applied objectively — consequently, its use is justifiably limited.
2. “Habeas corpus” applies to wrongfully HOLDING somebody. Deporting illegals doesn’t aim to hold them, it aims to EXPEL them from a place where they have no right to be.
3. Illegal aliens DO NOT HAVE “all other civil rights” — they ONLY have the minimum civil rights of a “Person” under the 14th Amendment, which provision ALSO excludes them from enjoying all the “privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States”.
Citizens have the civil right to virtually unrestricted travel within the United States and to do so largely (but not entirely) without documentation. Illegal aliens are neither privileged Constitutionally to enjoy that same civil right nor others thay citizens enjoy.
Mass deportation of people with a LEGAL right of abode is indeed deplorable and symptomatic of many Dictatorships. However REPATRIATING people who trespass on your land ILLEGALLY is simple common sense. Which is of course why left wing moonbats dont get it.
the operative word is … ‘ILLEGAL” … if they want to come here to work/live/go to school, there are steps and pepaerwork to get here legally …
ILLEGAL menas it ain’t right no matter whatever else you say about it or what color you paint it … .. .
y’all take care – Salute America
All ids should be furnished at all dui or traffic stops or for any reason by everyone all the time. No exceptions. Everyone should be legal who is here.Too many fake ssn and drivers licenses. Let us get new chips for all info under skin nationwide. Triple check all facts. No free education nor medical nor jobs for illegals. No welfare for sure. Poor California. They need more rules and discipline and lower salaried government people. Pelosi should give up all private jets, and she should fly commercial. Stop some wasteful spending. Cut political funding, expense accounts in half, and travel down to zero. Make them pay their own personal bills. Audit all Congressmen and all Obama appointees everywhere for tax and penalties and fees. No discounts for the crooks. Holder should quit being antiAmerican. Leave Arizona alone. They are right. Close the border tighter than ever. Stop drug cartels and terrorists now. Help America be better, and kick out the corrupt, lying spendthrifts in offices now.Particularly the dems.I hate the atrocious spending and skyrocketing deficits by Obama. Has he no money sense? No common sense? No business sense? Cut the spending and cut the taxes. Quit lying and smearing people.2010 should be an eye opener to people tired of flagrant spending and waste. Just wait until 2012. Wish it were now.
Professor Rotunda (interesting name), what you didn’t touch on was the financial, safety component of said illegal aliens.
Nearly EVERY city, albeit the Northern U.S. may be spared, feel the effects of illegal aliens with gangs, violence occurring in the streets, schools. Overcrowded prisons. Many illegal aliens having untreatable TB and other diseases, though here they are picking our fruit, veggies, cooking/washing in restaurants, in schools with our children etc.,
The money spent on food stamps (I hope the Union adopts OK’s and MO’s protocol), Section 8 Housing, Hospitals, public education/’free’ breakfast lunch and in some instances dinner at said schools.
ESL teachers flourish whereas a myriad of after school programs are nixed for budgetary reasons. Band, sports, tutoring.. gone.
Mass deportation, E-Verify, I say use ALL manners of to secure our country, border. Choosing 1 leaves too much wiggle room. JMO..
Hear, hear!!
Your friendly neighborhood bank, can I help you?
Customer: Yes, I want to cancel my account. I don’t want to do business
with you any longer.
The Bank: Why?
Customer: You’re giving credit to illegal immigrants and I don’t think
it’s right. I’m taking my business elsewhere.
The Bank: Well, Mr. Customer, we don’t want to see you do that, but we
can’tstop you. I’ll help you close the account. What is your account number?
Customer: (gives account number)
The Bank: For security purposes and for your protection, can you please
give me the last four digits of your social security number?
Customer: No?
The Bank: Mr. Customer, I need to verify your information, but in order
to helpyou, I’ll need verification of who you are..
Customer: Why should I give you my social security number? The reason
I’m closing my account is that your bank is issuing credit cards to illegal
immigrants who don’t have social security numbers. You are targeting that audience and
want their business. Let’s say I’m an illegal immigrant and you’ve given me a
credit card. I have a question about it and call for assistance. You wouldn’t
be asking me for a Social Security number, would you?
The Bank: No sir, I wouldn’t.
Customer: Why not?
The Bank: Because you would have pressed ’2′ to speak in Spanish. We
don’t ask for that information when calling in on the Spanish line.
Wow…is this true?
MOVING TO MEXICO
Dear President Obama:
I’m planning to move my family and extended family into Mexico for my health, and I would like to ask you to assist me. We’re planning to simply walk across the border from the U.S. into Mexico , and we’ll need your help to make a few arrangements. We plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas, passports, immigration quotas and laws. I’m sure they handle those things the same way you do here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Calderon, that I’m on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the following:
1. Free medical care for my entire family.
2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might need, whether I use them or not.
3. Please print all Mexican Government forms in English.
4. I want my grand-kids to be taught Spanish by English-speaking (bi-lingual) teachers.
5. Tell their schools they need to include classes on American culture and history.
6. I want my grand-kids to see the American flag on one of the flag poles at their school.
7. Please plan to feed my grand-kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
8. I will need a local Mexican driver’s license so I can get easy access to government services.
9. I do plan to get a car and drive in Mexico , but I don’t plan to purchase car insurance, and I probably won’t make any special effort to learn local traffic laws.
10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo from their president to leave me alone, please be sure that every patrol car has at least one English-speaking officer.
11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my housetop, put U S. flag decals on my car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any complaints or negative comments from the locals.
12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, or have any labor or tax laws enforced on any business I may start.
13. Please have the president tell all the Mexican people to be extremely nice and never say critical things about me or my family, or about the strain we might place on their economy.
14. I want to receive free food stamps.
15. Naturally, I’ll expect free rent subsidies.
16. I’ll need income tax credits so that although I don’t pay Mexican taxes, I’ll receive money from the government.
17. Please arrange it so that the Mexican Government pays $4,500.00 to help me buy a new car.
18. Oh yes, I almost forgot, please enroll me free into the Mexican Social Security program so that I’ll get a monthly income in retirement.
I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things for all his people who walk over to the U.S. from Mexico . I am sure that President Calderon won’t mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely.
Thank you so much for your kind help.
LOL — nice.
With California facing a $42 billion deficit in the current economic downturn, a glum Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has warned that the Golden State is on the brink of insolvency. So lets take a “statistical” peak?
The land of illegal immigrants, socialism, and the high taxes to pay for it all. The brutal tax increases will cost the average California family an extra $1,000 a year in taxes. Californians will now pay a 8.25% state sales tax, this makes the total sales as high as 10% depending on the county. This is the highest state sales tax in the nation. Californians will have a quarter percent increase in state income tax and the dependent credit will drop 66%. This move would most likely make California second in highest state income taxes. California vehicle tax will double,making it one of the highest in the nation. The staggering 12 cent increase in state gas tax was nixed to get one more Republican vote. However, Californians already have has the third highest state gas tax in the nation. A brutal .353 cents per gallon.
California leaning towards massive tax hike. California already has some of the highest taxes in the nation to pay for it’s massive illegal alien population and socialist policies. Also because of high taxes and easy access to an illegal work force, California leads the nation in off the books cash only businesses who are not paying taxes. With businesses run out of the state, or simply not paying taxes, California now gets over half it’s revenue from state income tax alone.
Did you know that the state of California gave 432 million dollars worth of welfare and food stamps to illegal aliens in LA County with “anchor babies.” This is just the illegal aliens who are legally receiving welfare under California state law. This doesn’t count the illegals who’s children were born overseas and are fraudulently receiving welfare. The state also spends an estimated 400 million a year for health care for illegal aliens in LA County. With the costs of schooling and incarcerating illegals, the combined strain on the state and county for illegal aliens in LA County is easily in excess of 2 Billion dollars per year.
Nationally, Across America, every state, county, and city is going bankrupt. The state in the worst shape is California which is now 58% non-white. Welfare, free health care, and other public services to immigrants is pushing America to the brink. Instead of closing the border, Obama recently issued a back door amnesty for illegal aliens from Haiti. Even releasing Haitian illegal aliens from detention centers who have already been convicted of crimes in the United States! (From NumbersUSA) Approximately 1/2 of immigrant households (both legal and illegal) with kids access welfare services, primarily food and Medicaid. Many argue that immigration is a social issue, but it’s a fiscal issue as well. The immigrant population has grown by an average of 1.3 million per year since 2000, plus an additional 1 million new births in those households. That’s 23 million new people every decade, and HALF of all immigrant families are using welfare, especially food and Medicaid welfare! This includes illegal AND legal immigrants.
When Nobel Prize-winning libertarian economist Milton Friedman was asked about unlimited immigration in 1999, he stated that “it is one thing to have free immigration to jobs. It is another thing to have free immigration to welfare. And you cannot have both.”
Again, well stated.
Of course Calif. wants to keeps it’s illegals…they hire them thru independent contractors. According to a Cal-Trans offical all they ask of the contractor is that they pay prevailing wage. I assume that PGE uses the same practice because they have come on my property to check the lines with one speaking english and one not.
naturally like your web-site but you have to check the spelling on quite a few of your posts. Many of them are rife with spelling problems and I in finding it very bothersome to inform the reality on the other hand I will surely come back again.
You could definitely see your skills in the paintings you write. The world hopes for more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. All the time follow your heart.