High Court Upholds AZ Immigration Law

[Foxrac]

Good chance the court will rule the same.....The make up of the court isn't likely to change between now and then.

Not any chance to me because they are totally different laws. SB 1070 is about require law enforcement to question over immigrant status outside of ICE and other one is about mandatory E-Verify.

 

[Reba]

Yes, they do. They provide for the illegality of hiring illegal aliens and the punsihment of those who do. That is the purpose the the law, both state and Federal.

The Feds have no provision for forcing businesses to use the database. The states do. Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

 

[jillio]

The Feds have no provision for forcing businesses to use the database. The states do. Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

The purpose and intent of the laws are still the same. Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

 

[TXgolfer]

Yep. I'm sure. Precedent only need be set in the lower Federal courts.

yeah. Supreme Court never overrules a lower court.

 

[TXgolfer]

Not any chance to me because they are totally different laws. SB 1070 is about require law enforcement to question over immigrant status outside of ICE and other one is about mandatory E-Verify.

I guess we will have to wait and see. *shrug*

 

[jillio]

yeah. Supreme Court never overrules a lower court.

Rarely do they overturn a decision made by a Federal district court.

But just keep hoping. I know how important these laws are to you.

 

[Foxrac]

I guess we will have to wait and see. *shrug*

Sure, fair enough.

It isn't scare me about situation with immigrants and I'm glad that I'm US born, not immigrant.

 

[Jiro]

yeah. Supreme Court never overrules a lower court.

that's because... well let me quote this from my NRA magazine. It's brilliant.

a little background - it's about Maryland Supreme Court (lower courts) being shrewd and misguided with Supreme Court's ruling on District of Columbia v. Heller. Maryland is extremely hostile toward Second Amendment and believes that Second Amendment applies to only "militia" aka National Guards instead of law-abiding citizens.

"Instead, the Maryland Supreme Court reached out to crush the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

The Court pointed out that Heller and McDonald had both involved possession of handguns in the home. Therefore, according to the Maryland court, nothing that the Supreme Court said about carrying was legally binding. It was a mere "dicta." Dicta is a non-binding expression of legal opinion that is not part of a court's rationale for deciding a case. So the Maryland court concluded: "If the Supreme Court, in this dicta, meant its holding to extend beyond home possession, it will need to say so more plainly."

This is very poor reasoning. First of all, Supreme Court justices are not seventh-grade students who are trying to pad their decisions with enough words to make the paper long enough to satisfy a teacher. Everything the Supreme Court writes in an opinion is meant to instruct lower courts - especially when the Court is writing a major opinion about a subject (such as the Second Amendment) on which the Court had previously written little."

while the subject is different... the very concept is same.

 

[Reba]

The purpose and intent of the laws are still the same. Why do you keep ignoring that fact?

The purpose of the Fed's database is to fulfill the purpose of the states' laws that will actually make businesses use them. They should be working hand-in-hand, not competing.

If the purpose and intent is the same, why do the Fed's keep fighting the states?

 

[TXgolfer]

The purpose of the Fed's database is to fulfill the purpose of the states' laws that will actually make businesses use them. They should be working hand-in-hand, not competing.

If the purpose and intent is the same, why do the Fed's keep fighting the states?

Fixed for you

 

[Jiro]

The purpose of the Fed's database is to fulfill the purpose of the states' laws that will actually make businesses use them. They should be working hand-in-hand, not competing.

If the purpose and intent is the same, why do the Fed's keep fighting the states?

because they're fighting over the concept. It's not supposed to be this way - The federal government fulfilling the state's law. It's other way around.

 

[Foxrac]

The gub is a Donkey..... He is seeing what unions have done to California. Even Gavin Newsom went to Texas to see how things work.

Oh, I made additional statement that I forgot in previous post, I think that California should follow Florida's footprint to pass the law that any of agreement with collective bargaining cannot reach so all favor will goes to employers and employees will have stuck with collective bargaining agreement that set by employer. It is better than kill the collective bargaining that cause political fallout and big upset the public workers. They cannot strike either because most of agreement for public employers that cannot strike due to disagree with employer.

For example, if employer wants $150 per month for health insurance so employees don't agree with it so they will stuck to pay $150 per month for health insurance that favored by employer.

 

[TXgolfer]

because they're fighting over the concept. It's not supposed to be this way - The federal government fulfilling the state's law. It's other way around.

oh you forgot the second sentence....

And the obama admin would rather spend taxpayer $$$ quibbling with states than doing their job in the first place.

 

[Beowulf]

I'm amazed at the turnaround. You would think the Republicans would drool over the prospect of cheap labor and Democrats to be fervently anti-immigration, but look what we have. Both parties are not being true to their real ideologies but running planks in anticipation of the next election. It will be interesting to see where it stops. No wonder Keagan stepped out of the ruling.

 

[TXgolfer]

I'm amazed at the turnaround. You would think the Republicans would drool over the prospect of cheap labor and Democrats to be fervently anti-immigration, but look what we have. Both parties are not being true to their real ideologies but running planks in anticipation of the next election. It will be interesting to see where it stops. No wonder Keagan stepped out of the ruling.

Generalize much?

 

[Jiro]

oh you forgot the second sentence....

And the obama admin would rather spend taxpayer $$$ quibbling with states than doing their job in the first place.

Why would White House be quibbling with states in the first place?

beside... governors' closets ain't clean anyway.

 

[Beowulf]

Generalize much?

Wait till I split hairs.

 

[TXgolfer]

Why would White House be quibbling with states in the first place?

beside... governors' closets ain't clean anyway.

You would have to ask the White House.... Why didn't they just do it right in the first place

 

[Jiro]

You would have to ask the White House.... Why didn't they just do it right in the first place

if governors can't keep their cities/towns safe to... I dunno - 0 crime a year... then how can they expect White House to do same?

I believe our border security and enforcement is better than ever.

 

[jillio]

The purpose of the Fed's database is to fulfill the purpose of the states' laws that will actually make businesses use them. They should be working hand-in-hand, not competing.

If the purpose and intent is the same, why do the Fed's keep fighting the states?

We are talking about the purpose of the law. And, as I have continually said, the purpose and intent of the the law is to make it illegal to hire illegal aliens and to punish those who do.

Simple. Redundancy.