Arizona immigration Law Partially Blocked

[Hoosier Gun Coat]

Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law - Yahoo! News

"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," Bolton, a Clinton appointee, said in her decision.

How is this any different than getting pulled over for a speeding ticket. Don't I have to wait untill the officer checks MY status? Is MY liberty being restricted? Since when did illegals deserve any LIBERTY? This counrty is going in the toilet. FAST!!!!!

 

[christman]

This isn't surprising... It will be in the legal system until the feds finally make their own overhaul.. Whenever that may be.

 

[$mooth]

Since when did illegals deserve any LIBERTY? This

Illegals don't, really; but how do you know right away? I think the fear is that too many legal immigrants and citizens will be harrassed.

But overall, I agree with the rest of your sentiments. This is . A sane practice would be to check ID (like you would anyways) and if they didn't have an ID on them, ask for a social or name and address. Hold them up for a couple minutes while you run it through the database. And again, this only happens when they're in trouble for something else already.

Viva Arizona! Fight the good fight!

 

[Rob377]

Bolton (judge hearing the case) was a Clinton appointee. This was to be expected.

Just skimmed over the order granting the injunction. Pretty poorly reasoned.

 

[Disposable Heart]

Stinks!

My only option is the annexation of Mexico, make at least 7-8 new states out of it...

Been a heck of a tobaggan ride folks...

 

[88GT]

I've posed this question in several venues today, but have not received any feedback. So I'll throw it out for you guys.

Part of the ruling enjoins requiring illegals to carry on their person documentation attesting to their identity (and presumably, their immigration status). However, the 70-year-old FEDERAL law also requires all foreign nationals (legal status is moot) to carry on their person and provide upon request documentation attesting to their identity AND immigration status.

Illegals are by definition foreign nationals. So is this judge effectively scrapping 70 years of federal immigration law as well? She didn't just prohibit inquiry into their status; she essentially nullified a federal requirement that also happened to be in the AZ statute.

 

[E5RANGER375]

the administration pulled out one of their lap dogs. not suprising.

shoot them as they cross the border. that cant be reversed by anyone!!

 

[Rob377]

I've posed this question in several venues today, but have not received any feedback. So I'll throw it out for you guys.

Part of the ruling enjoins requiring illegals to carry on their person documentation attesting to their identity (and presumably, their immigration status). However, the 70-year-old FEDERAL law also requires all foreign nationals (legal status is moot) to carry on their person and provide upon request documentation attesting to their identity AND immigration status.

Illegals are by definition foreign nationals. So is this judge effectively scrapping 70 years of federal immigration law as well? She didn't just prohibit inquiry into their status; she essentially nullified a federal requirement that also happened to be in the AZ statute.

The Federal requirement still stands, as it was only the state law involved. However, it's more or less pointless since Federal authorities are essentially under orders not to enforce this law.
AZ state authorities don't have the authority to enforce Federal Law. (which is why they attempted to make it a state violation in the first place)

 

[dleeharrison]

WTF! This ruling , not unexpected, slays me. If an individual is a United States citizen then he/she has nothing to fear. If they are here illegally, then they either need to start the process of becoming a US citizen or get out!! Simple as that!

 

[Panama]

If I was in AZ and I got pulled over, I think I would just say,
"no hablo ingles" might work?

 

[mrjarrell]

the administration pulled out one of their lap dogs. not suprising.

shoot them as they cross the border. that cant be reversed by anyone!!

I have to wonder. If we can't talk about armed revolution at INGO, why is it permissible that someone can call for the murder of people crossing an imaginary line?

 

[Panama]

Not a total threadjack......oh well yes it is, but anyway.

Posted these pictures in a different thread, but in honor of Judge Bolton and her decision here they are again.

The following pictures were all taken in Texas during the drought of '09 of course the last picture is the one worth a thousand words!

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I told you this was a bad idea, that the courts will obviously favor the side of the illegals, and Barak Abdul Hussein Obama will grant them amnesty.


Some folks around these parts better wake the eff up and quick.

Personally, with alot of the logic here, I dont see why many of you arent supporting amnesty, that makes everything about the illegality of the situation go flush.

 

[Ogre]

I told you this was a bad idea, that the courts will obviously favor the side of the illegals, and Barak Abdul Hussein Obama will grant them amnesty.


Some folks around these parts better wake the eff up and quick.

Personally, with alot of the logic here, I dont see why many of you arent supporting amnesty, that makes everything about the illegality of the situation go flush.

Not following you, please expound upon.

 

[NordicHeathenVinlander]

I have to wonder. If we can't talk about armed revolution at INGO, why is permissible that someone can call for the murder of people crossing an imaginary line?

INGO is responsible for the content of the website, upto and including calling for revolutions, which will undoubtedly mark everyone here as extremist, which is deadly in the professional career world.

But calling for the murder is also just that.

However, an Illegal alien is granted the same status as an invading army, and since they total (Speculatively) 60 million in America, I'd say there ought to be a right to defend our Nation.

I personally dont care to hear the liberal arguement of "They just want a better life" - tell them to stay in they're crap hole of nation, and MAKE IT BETTER. But since we can see the communist trend following the illegal hordes, I doubt that is one of the reason.

 

[semperfi211]

Not a total threadjack......oh well yes it is, but anyway.

Posted these pictures in a different thread, but in honor of Judge Bolton and her decision here they are again.

The following pictures were all taken in Texas during the drought of '09 of course the last picture is the one worth a thousand words!

If it weren't for the first eight pics I would say too bad that water wasn't full of anti freeze.

 

[88GT]

The Federal requirement still stands, as it was only the state law involved. However, it's more or less pointless since Federal authorities are essentially under orders not to enforce this law.
AZ state authorities don't have the authority to enforce Federal Law. (which is why they attempted to make it a state violation in the first place)

So it's a matter of enforcement and who has the jurisdiction? Am I understanding it correctly?

 

[semperfi211]

This will end up in the SCOTUS.

 

[flagtag]

Looks to me like a certain judge is hoping for a Supreme Court appointment.

A traitor is a traitor, no matter what level of government (or civilian) they exist at.

"Our" government is putting our country at risk - for VOTES!

 

[MinuteMan47]

shoot them as they cross the border. that cant be reversed by anyone!!

I have to wonder. If we can't talk about armed revolution at INGO, why is it permissible that someone can call for the murder of people crossing an imaginary line?

I wouldn't call it murder. I would call it DEFENSE for OUR COUNTRY. How about all of our soldiers over seas? Are they murderers? What if they were HERE defending OUR BORDERS?!