![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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?! |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() 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 ![]()
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
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.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() 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.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() 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?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
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. |