Arizona taking away constitutional rights?
 

Sorry, Dell, I simply couldn't resist :rolleyes:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ation_law.html

That link doesn't work.

I am wondering what you mean since certainly illegal aliens breaking our laws do not have constitutional rights, as they are not citizens.

Just interested in what constitutional right is being violated. Demanding ID after a traffic stop, suspicious person is done all the time to everyone in fact happened to me last Saturday. And I trust now you don't believe in State's rights? What next? Crowning the Obama family making him king and the family royals? Fittingly the link didn't work for me either.

While I did not open the link, Riot is probably referring to the new law proprosal (I do not believe it has been voted on yet) in Arizona that says children born in the United States to Illegals will not be US citzens.. which is unconstitutional, and the Arizona folks would be smart to toss out that law.

Though I do not believe the other law (asking for ID's) is that big of a deal.

If it is as you describe, that new proposal will be thrown out, on the simple grounds that since Arizona is part of the U.S., any child born in Arizona has been born in the United States.

Now I've heard law arguments indicating some ambiguity in the status of children born here from illegal aliens, but if that ever is changed it will be at the Federal level and not piecemeal from one state versus the rest.

exactly.. I imagine that is the law proposal that Riot was talking about.. but I guess you never know with Riot ;)

AZ
 

:tro::tro:

Lori you know her!

"President Obama has spoken out against the law because he thinks that the federal government should be determining immigration policy," Clinton said in a June 8 interview with Ecuadoran television channel NTN24.

The law, which is set to take effect on July 29, makes it a crime to be in Arizona without proper immigration papers and requires local police, who are not federal agents responsible for immigration matters, to determine if people are in the country illegally.

she meant this I'm sure because after all, she is Riot!

I didn't mean that at all. I agree with your statement.

Oh, and just use Dell's link. It's all in the interpretation

Nope

Many, including myself, do. We'll see.

What do you want Police to do? Use tarot cards?

As I said last Saturday I was pulled over for speeding. The first thing I was asked for was my DL, the second was my proof of insurance. I don't look illegal (maybe the tan) so what gives. Lol

BTW got clocked at 83 in a 55 and the cop was nice enough to write it for 70 in a 55 saving about $150 on the ticket. Now if I had been illegal or wanted I'd have expected to be arrested and rightfully so.

Some real simple questions (hint answer is yes or no)

1) Should an illegal pulled over by a police officer (not Fed) and found to have an active foreign extradition warrant be arrested, held and extradited?

2) Should an illegal pulled over by police (not Fed) for a non-detain violation be arrested and turned over to Federal authorities for processing?

If yes to 1 and no to 2 move on to question 3. :zz: If not :tro:

3) Do you consider foreign laws to be supreme to homeland laws?

It is standard practice to request identification from someone when they attract a cops attention. Why its now being made into an issue I don't know

because in some people's minds illegals have it tough enough and deserve a pass?

I will give credit where it's due as locally 26 illegals tied to gangs were picked up on a joint effort of local police and Feds. Incidently most were living within 10 miles of Arlington Park. Wonder if police let other illegals living with the gang bangers alone as it seems odd all were picked up by themselves? Don't understand why they don't release names and addresses as that would help neighbors figure out who are the landlords renting to gang members and illegals. Local papers publish names and addresses of shoplifters for Christ sake.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/24...iens19.article

Where, and since when, does that identification have to not only identify you, but also prove you are an American citizen? Such business being a function of our federal - not state - government. Only Arizona.

Since when did local police become empowered with enforcing federal law, independent of the feds? I think they should also have demanded proof you are not in arrears on your federal income tax.

What did you currently have on your possession that proved you were an American citizen? Not a drivers license. So you would have gone to jail in AZ, until you could have proved it.

i thought the new law in az was to allow, or encourage, a policeman who suspects illegality, in this case immigration violations, to further investigate? seems like it would be just one more thing to check into-after all, no doubt your local sheriff is supposed to turn you in if the feds want you for other crimes, kidnapping for instance. why is it that local and regional police forces can handle a variety of crimes, but immigration violations are off limits? is this really that difficult a crime to investigate? what makes it so special? feds want you, they turn you over...u.s. marshals, same thing. state wants you, the locals hold you til the state comes and gets you....so what's the big deal about this?

All law enforcement agencies are not the same, nor do they have the same jurisdiction and powers. I don't want my local sheriff investigating me for income tax evasion - do you?

Turning someone over to a different jurisdiction when there is a want/warrant already out for their arrest is NOT the same thing as initiating an investigation into a possible violation of federal law by a local law enforcement agency who does not hold federal jurisdiction.

Currently, if a local cop suspects you of violating federal law, they contact the appropriate federal agency: US Marshal, FBI, etc. They do not do any investigation or arrests on that level independently.

Seriously - I find it simply terrifying that any local yahoo sheriff, any cop on the street in Chicago, or a one-horse town in Nebraska, etc could independently - without contacting the currently appropriate authority - initiate a federal investigation into a violation of federal law. RICO, federal income tax, etc. Talk about Big Brother, big government, loss of personal rights and freedoms!

this is untrue. if someone is stopped, they're found to be wanted, they're arrested and then turned over.

and i'm sorry, i'm not terrified at the thought of a sheriff, deputy, or other trained law enforcement officer with probable cause investigating a suspect. rico, federal income tax? lol when the irs starts issuing warrants because you evaded taxes, i'd imagine they'd appreciate the local law enforcement officer picking up anyone with an iou. you might not find this is a big deal, but for az, it is. they are stranded out there on the mexico border, and are dealing with this issue on a daily basis, and aren't getting any help from the feds, who are supposed to be taking care of this problem. but they aren't, so az is caught between a rock and a hard place.

You misunderstood what I said, which is true. You are blending two separate things together. Yes, if a want or warrant already exists, the appropriate federal (or other state, etc) department is contacted, and an arrest can be made by a local agency. But that warrant already exists - it was issued under the different department, or by the feds.

But a state or local agency does not initiate federal investigations on their own - they do not have the jurisdiction.

And yes, I would be very concerned about our federal government extending their reach and influence down into the local police department.

In Arizona per the new law it would be a state investigation now, the Feds can just hide and watch.

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.