ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: Supreme Court Smackdown On Brit, Obama, and Olde

  1. #1
    Arizona can punish those who hire illegals!

    LOL. Total and complete fail for illegal aliens and their supporters.

  2. #2
    Arizona can punish those who hire illegals!

    LOL. Total and complete fail for illegal aliens and their supporters.

  3. #3
    That's essentially all that needs done to apply the brakes to the illegal tide. Without a job to come to, there isn't much reason for hanging around or making the trip in the first place.

    I'd expect a flood of similar legislation from many states with it being supported by the Supreme Court. That and much hand wringing with accusations of the court being racist, bigoted, and what ever other names la raza can recklessly come up with. I wouldn't be at all surprised if certain posters made similar pronouncements.
    This message brought to you by the vast right wing conspiracy.

  4. #4
    GREAT NEWS!!! thanks you for posting Federale86. Go Arizona!!! Go Jan Brewer!!! Go Sheriff Joe!!! Have a wonderful Memorial Day weekend.

  5. #5
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by federale86:
    Arizona can punish those who hire illegals!

    LOL. Total and complete fail for illegal aliens and their supporters.
    </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    U fool, the ruling is backed 5-3, it has at least one of so called "Liberal" Justices (to the left of the current SCOTUS Center represented by A.Kennedy ) voting for it.
    And, most likely, Anthony Kennedy joined majority or abstained and didn't vote against (the very same Justice who ruled on separate case against detention and deportation of "collaterally" detained in raids individuals , in absence of any probable cause. You have now SCOTUS granted right to remain silent if asked by any federal agent of your immigration status).

    The ruling you refer to clearly says that Arizona doesn't trample or conflict with Federal regulations because it merely mirrors the Federal guidelines and relies on very Federal database to determine eligibility of workers to do the job they are hired to do.

    That's a HUUUUUUUGE distance away from endorsing deputies of Arpaio to racially profile , detain and abuse anyone they wish to , just because someone "looks like an illegal" (try hard to define first what it means to "look like an illegal").



    davdah, read the SCOTUS ruling first, then the article about it. This is a separate case, has nothing to do with SB 1070, it merely requires businesses in State of AZ to UNIFORMLY check through Federally available E-Verify database EVERYONE who is being hired and only targets those businesses who FAIL to comply with regulations put in place by the Federal govt.
    That's not the same as jumping on the "illegal looking" guy on the street, handcuffing and jailing and turning over to ICE the same, ONLY for ICE to set the individual free after confirming the authenticity of US issued Birth Certificate.
    http://www.anbsoft.com/images/usflag_med.jpg

    "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit

  6. #6
    sorry, I meant to write ''thank''. I'm getting ready for the long weekend so I'm in a rush.

  7. #7
    I don't think this gives Ole Joe consent to roust the barrio. The primary motivation for crossing the border without consent is work. Take that away and so goes the desire to take the chance. Stay tuned for further developments. This is the crackdown being made an incremental process of implementation. So much for Obama being the illegal's buddy
    This message brought to you by the vast right wing conspiracy.

  8. #8
    Hardly a smackdown. It simply mirrors existing Federal law. Kinda pointless exercise really. All it does is make Jan Brewer and her fellow cronies feel good about themselves.
    "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

  9. #9
    Pointless? There was no law requiring E-verify before this. Now they must run the identity check on new hires. I didn't read the entire bill to see if it entails checking on existing employees but I would guess it doesn't since E-verify by it's user guide states it's not to be used to check after the fact. This is a huge step and will be infinitely more effective than anything Joe could ever have hoped to accomplish.
    This message brought to you by the vast right wing conspiracy.

  10. #10
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by davdah:
    I don't think this gives Ole Joe consent to roust the barrio. The primary motivation for crossing the border without consent is work. Take that away and so goes the desire to take the chance. Stay tuned for further developments. This is the crackdown being made an incremental process of implementation. So much for Obama being the illegal's buddy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    1. The idea of "take the jobs away and magic will happen" is cooked up in the plushy seated, comfortable cabinets of center of immigration studies and related non-profs. Those guys should be writing novels, like Tolkien, but no, they all imagine to be perfect experts until their ideas end up in practical fiasco decades and many victims later.

    To have a true knowledge and comprehension of what motivates 11 million illegals is a task that is ultimately beyond possible due to the large variations of individual motives of such a large group of people whose only common trait is being in US without proper documentation.

    But even if you tried to pick the statistically largest group that had at least some similarities based on which you could device a motivational strategy , so you could the target as a biggest chunk to be removed, you would still need more than being an eye doctor , driving through downtown maim street and seeing only a mass of dark skinned people looking for a job. You would at very least need to step down from your car or pick up truck and stand there, right next to those guys, and live at least few years in their shoes. Even better if you can go to Mexico, start there and move all the way across border here, get to some major hub where most end up and see for yourself what truly motivates you to do things as you wake up , go to work or just live your life , day to day , away from where you came from and unwilling to return.

    I venture to say this again: the majority of those who are here are here due to "push factor" (getting away from country of origin) rather than "pull factor" (coming here to work slave shifts, 12 hours a day, with gas prices and housing costs making $10 an hour today less than 1/5 of its' worth 15-20 years ago).That there is an opportunity to make some dough in the US is secondary , as a sort of luxury, as opposed to necessity to get out of where many come from (and many among them are those who do not come from cow milking or ballooned from starvation background and have it harder way getting paid in US than they had to do where they came from). Those who are here will not return if jobs are removed.

    The only way to remove 11 mil or 20 mils is to do it the way Eisenhower did: run it as a military operation, remove the agents and local law enforcement currently present on border states who may not be too earnestly performing their tasks, put people with military discipline on the border and interior and just go from house to house, 10000-20000 agents per months (each agent with a quota of at least 3 illegal alien arestees per day) , per State, from one State to the next, relentlessly and ultimately removing every single alien who is apprehended and can not produce ultimate proof of legal status in US. This visible mass exodus will then instill a panic and cause massive fleeing across the Southern border , like you would route an army in a battle field. That is the only practical way to achieve mass deportation ( and i think, eventually this is the way it will be done under one of the next post-Obama administrations), the rest is f.airy tales for Tolkien readers who better smoke a pipe than meddle in creating blueprints for a solution of a problem they have no clue about.


    The right way , of course, would be not to treat these entire population as if they were just so many Helots , instead have a comprehensive approach , separating those who must be deported from those who should be allowed to apply for some for of relief, but practically speaking , it's the mood of the day that always decides such issues therefore i don't see it will be done any other way than the way Eisenhower did it in 1954.
    Anywho, it is not there yet. And these silly 'remove jobs and do magic' talk is that of silly dilettantes. I find it odd how do they buy people like you, who seem to have more practical sense to know better.


    2. As to Obama, only the most stupid and naive could have thought that he would be in power or in a position to do anything practically or exerting an energetic executive policy making force to bring changes he promised.
    Obama is non-confrontationalPresident whose primary goal from day one was to do nothing or as little as possible for his core constituents that elected him, while trying to somehow please those who are political opponents of the party on whose ticket he was elected.
    I think his main goal is to avoid any sort of controversy and confrontation at all costs possible. This doesn't translate to being energetic advocate of measures that would raise the ire of very people he is too apprehensive to make angry.

    But still, it is much better than what will happen after his administration is gone.
    Under Napolitano his immigration agencies at least issued memos instructing do dismiss deportation cases of people in removal proceedings who are eligible for adjustment of status and one can easily envision how would it all be run had there been Joe Arpaio or Brewer in charge , as opposed to Obama appointees.
    http://www.anbsoft.com/images/usflag_med.jpg

    "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit

Similar Threads

  1. What the Supreme Court's immigration ruling means for Arizonans
    By BoardWizard in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-05-2012, 03:58 PM
  2. Obama nominates Racist to Supreme Court
    By SonofMichael in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 06-05-2009, 03:45 PM
  3. The Supreme Court has spoken!
    By Native in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-22-2006, 07:31 PM
  4. Supreme Court Strikes Down Texas Sodomy Law
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-05-2003, 06:45 PM
  5. LAWYER FOR APPEAL IN SUPREME COURT?
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-2003, 08:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: