again, this isn't necessarily true. counterfeiting currency (for example) is a federal felony, with the secret service holding jurisdiction. yet local, regional, and state police arrest people, investigate people, all the time on this charge.

'Counterfeiting money is a federal felony. Unlike other federal crimes, the Secret Service is in charge of investigating counterfeiting cases ...'


http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...nterfeit+money

and then there's this:

http://www.freelawanswer.com/law/1191-2-law-4.html


We often initiate federal crime investigations and often do the entire investigation. The results of our investation are submitted to the District Attorney. The District Attorney consults with the U.S. attorney's office and the 2 attorneys' offices determine whether the crime will be prosecuted in state or federal court.


Local police investigate crimes based on either complaints from citizens or their own observations. Prosecutors decide whether the evidence presented by the police is best handled under state or federal law. If a local prosecutor or police department finds evidence that suggests a federal violation, they ordinarily will contact the office of the U.S. Attorney in their district, and the U.S. Attorney will coordinate the response, and ultimately decide whether the prosecution should be state or federal, or whether additional investigation is required.

If there is additional investigation required and the crime is apparently federal, most often the U.S. Attorney will request that the local FBI office get involved

when the local Federally insured bank's alarm goes off local police beat the Feds to the scene by hours and sometimes a day.

This statement gives great insight into your reasoning as you equate being in arrears with taxes to being in the country illegally despite the fact being in arrears with Federal taxes is not a crime.

What happpens when in the future, an illegal is found without health insurance? Do we fine him for not having insurance? Deport him for being illegal? Or give him health insurance and leave him alone?

WTF?

http://www.thefoxnation.com/illegal-...ght-fair-wages

Hey, the Dems want the economy to be in the crapper....so here ya go!

I guess she never thought about that.

I'm very confused

An illegal can now call the U.S. Department of Labor to file a complaint and they will go to bat for him? How? Is there a fair wage law on the books for illegals? What will the expense be to taxpayers?

No wonder States and towns are taking on the illegal situation themselves, the wonder lies in why the Fed is taking the side of illegals over States and ultimately the American citizens, paying taxes and living here legitimately?


and if anyone is confused why some side with deportation I offer this quote by the Lake County IL Sheriff. ""We're in this federal holding pattern … and it undermines the credibility of local law enforcement," said Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran, whose jurisdiction includes Waukegan. "It makes us look like we … have no interest in upholding the Constitution."

In the past four years, Lake County has seen its foreign-born population jump by nearly 19 percent to about 13,000 residents. Curran estimates that 20 percent of his jail population is in the country illegally."

How many crimes against society would be eliminated by eliminating this source?

Ummmmm 20 percent??

yep 20%!!!!


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...573,full.story

Under the jurisdiction of the Secret Service. As you point out:

The point is: who is in charge of American citizenship, naturalization, etc? The Feds.

Not the Lexington Police Department.

:zz: What in the world does that have to do with anything? The point is, that robbery of all banks (all banks are FDIC insured) is a federal crime. The feds prosecute it.

Sigh. You've missed the point (again). Being in arrears isn't a crime, true, not paying taxes is, indeed. And it's a federal crime. That is not investigated by the local police.

My "reasoning" is that there are matters of law under Federal jurisdiction, under state, and under local.

Citizenship, immigration, naturalization isn't "local" - our federal government is in charge of it.

We'll all find out when it goes to court.

the fact is, local and state police investigate crimes of all types, including federal crimes. you're ignoring the fact that local, regional, city and state police investigate crimes of every persuasion, including federal crimes. why should immunity be sacrosanct? it shouldn't. however, the feds have already said they'll ignore anyone that az refers to them-which i find laughable. they're supposed to take care of immigration, but they say they won't-and they wonder why az felt the need to pass this law?!

:zz: No, I'm not. Local and state police help the feds all the time. However, the law is federal law. The responsibility is federal responsibility.

We'll see what happens in court. I haven't seen any other arguments the feds will make.

I think states should make laws about federal income tax, and attempt to collect federal tax monies for the feds. Let's see how that goes over ;)

So what should a state do if hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens are coming in? They shouldn't be allowed to do anything about it?

That's not the question, though, is it? Can a state usurp federal responsibility? Can a state print money? Collect federal income tax? Previous American Supreme Courts say no. See the Civil War for an example.

I am all against illegal aliens. The feds need to do far more. I think Arizona's law infringes upon the civil liberties of American citizens. I hope it's struck down.

Of course that is the question. What can a state do if they are being overrun by illegal aliens? You are basically saying they shouldn't be able to do anything about it.

A state can't pass laws that are unconstitutional. But I personally don't think this law is unconstitutional. I guess the courts will decide but we both know that's it's just a matter of interpretation. One judge will say the law is fine while another will say it's not. It's lucky the Supreme Court has a smart majority right now.

Not at all. I am saying IMO they can't do "this" about it. As you say, we'll see. Wonder how long it will take to decide upon that.

Since you're not comfortable with this law, what would you be comfortable with allowing a state to do about the problem if the Feds did not help?

but, as i pointed out, the feds ask for, gladly accept assistance with many federal laws...this one should be treated no differently. it's not a special law. as i showed in posts above, local police investigate crimes, which may end up in federal court, fairly often. it's at the discretion of the district and states attorneys. it's not as tho police officers see a crime, or learn of a crime, say 'oh, it's federal', and ignore it. nor do they call the feds, and then forget about it. the feds don't have officers in every spot, ready at a moments' notice. if an investigation grows beyond a certain point, no doubt they step in. but for the most part, what i put above is true-the locals handle the investigation, and then turn the evidence over to the powers that be, who then decide on state or federal court. ignoring those facts won't make you right about who can investigate immigration violations. if the feds wish to argue it's theirs only to do, then they better show that's the case with all their federal laws. precedent has been set.

So if the Feds decided bank robbery was not a problem they would sue local police for responding and making an arrest?

All AZ wants is for the Fed to prosecute and deport based on existing Federal law. They are willing to take on the ground work themselves similar to how they handle bank robberies. If Obama & Co. don't like the law try and change it. Hey he passed healthcare despite the majority why not another?

I agree with you about illegals dont deserve to have constitutional rights because they are not US citizens. The funny thing is they get treated better in America then an American citizen would in a foreign prison.