Arizona Sued by the Federal Government

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

Walls built to keep people out can also be used to keep people in.[/quote]

WTF kinda pseudo profundity was this supposed to be? If we built a wall on the Mexican border of course it would keep people OUT of the US and IN Mexico.

I hereby strike you from my nomination list for the highly sought Rhetorician of the Year award.
[/quote]

How appropriate. I struck you from my list of people whose rigid, unwavering, misinformed, unintelligent opinions I give a fuck about months ago. [/quote]

So, you’re concerned about the US government not letting us leave the country?[/quote]

Not really. But I’d think someone paranoid enough to think that what we need is to surround ourselves with a bunch of fucking walls wouldn’t think it’s a stretch to also think that at some point those walls would be used to keep us in. I’m not trying to lump anyone in particular into that category so please don’t think that I am implying that you (or Push for that matter) are paranoiacs.

Look, building a huge wall on the Mexican border wouldn’t make our problems any better. They might be different problems, but they’d still be big ones. This country would become the outcasts of the international community if we did something like that. I understand that some people don’t seem to give a flying fuck about our standing amongst the other nations on this planet, but that view is an ignorant departure from reality.

We’ve got a bunch of people calling for all sorts of boycotts of Arizonan products right now over the enforcement of a basic law. How loud do you think those cries for boycotts and so forth would become if we built a wall across the border? Don’t you think that all sorts of different countries would take issue with our wall-building and that these countries would take certain steps to “punish” in whatever way they deem necessary or possible if we did such a thing? I’m not sure I’d blame them either. Shit, look at the international furor over the wall-building in Israel.

Also, a huge part of the argument for the eradication of illegal immigrants (and a very, very valid one) is the fact that they are a huge economic burden on this country. But think about it. Building and maintaining that wall could potentially be just as big an economic burden. Given that the wall would spawn a whole new set of issues for us, it’s hardly an investment with a large potential for a significant return on it.

Those fucking Mexican cartels would have every incentive to sabotage the wall at every chance they could get. The repairs we’d need to do to the wall would be expensive and given how dangerous the border has already become due to all of these cartels, it would be a highly dangerous repair. The construction itself would be highly dangerous. We have people going apeshit because of the deaths of soldiers in Afghanistan fighting a legit enemy. Can you imagine the uproar if we started losing American lives in the process of building some Draconian wall across our southern border?

I’m sorry, but to think that if we can just go down and build a wall across the border w/o inviting a whole slew of new problems that have nothing to do with illegal immigration is extremely short-sighted and ignorant. Like it or not, we’d become international pariahs and again, like it or not it is ridiculous to think that we can exist in this world as such a pariah without some negative consequences that could very well outweigh whatever positive benefits may come along with ridding ourselves of these fucking anchor babies and illegal workers.

The solution is simple. We as a country need to create an environment in which there are no jobs, there is no education and no healthcare (outside of emergency care) available to undocumented workers, period. Despite the backwards fiscal policies of the Obama administration we are not going to become a third-world country anytime soon and Mexico certainly isn’t going to become an economic power, so there will always be a reason for Mexicans to come here for work. But they will come here legally and be forced to pay into the same pool that covers their social services/healthcare/education/etc that we all do if there is no chance they can get work w/o proper documentation. We depend heavily on the existence of cheap labor, but illegal cheap labor is slowly bankrupting us. If Mexicans couldn’t come here illegally and get a job, it’s not like they’d just stop coming. They’d simply come here legally.

How do we do this? We go after the people who hire illegals with fire and brimstone. It is they who create the incentive for them to come here illegally and it is they who reward illegal immigrants who come here illegally with jobs.[/quote]

While I think DB is an asshole , I have to agree with him on most of his points on this issue
[/quote]
x2

62

There is NO current statute regarding states preempting the Feds on immigration policy. The Feds are going to cite “implied” preemption, and anytime you base your legal argument with “implied”, you’re fucked big time. I am curious to see how the Feds are going to base their argument, since there is no existing case law EVER with respect to this issue and their argument.

If anything, there are rulings UPHOLDING states rights in 4-5 circuits on this issue, which is what the AZ governor and her legal counsel Kris Kobach will be basing their argument on. Holder won’t even touch this case, and I wish he would, it would only show how inept he truly is. Watch 15-20 states jump all over this law and add it to their own immigration policy once Arizona wins in court.

Again, no racial profiling, violation of civil rights are even in the Federal Lawsuit, because someone finally read the bill and decided that argument doesn’t hold any water in court. Watch the ACLU get laughed out of court when they begin their argument with, “could be, might be, or a possibility of.” Justices don’t rule against laws because of what might happen or what could happen, we wouldn’t have a single law if that was the case.

The verdict… Arizona wins and Obama gets shamed beyond comprehension.

63

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
There is NO current statute regarding states preempting the Feds on immigration policy. The Feds are going to cite “implied” preemption, and anytime you base your legal argument with “implied”, you’re fucked big time. I am curious to see how the Feds are going to base their argument, since there is no existing case law EVER with respect to this issue and their argument. If anything, there are rulings UPHOLDING states rights in 4-5 circuits on this issue, which is what the AZ governor and her legal counsel Kris Kobach will be basing their argument on. Holder won’t even touch this case, and I wish he would, it would only show how inept he truly is. Watch 15-20 states jump all over this law and add it to their own immigration policy once Arizona wins in court.

Again, no racial profiling, violation of civil rights are even in the Federal Lawsuit, because someone finally read the bill and decided that argument doesn’t hold any water in court. Watch the ACLU get laughed out of court when they begin their argument with, “could be, might be, or a possibility of.” Justices don’t rule against laws because of what might happen or what could happen, we wouldn’t have a single law if that was the case.

The verdict… Arizona wins and Obama gets shamed beyond comprehension.[/quote]

There is no mention of racial profiling because it’s too hard to show that this is happening since the law won’t go into effect until July 29th. The feds will base their argument of pre-emption on the fact that the Constitution grants them exclusive power to set and enforce immigration policy. They will also argue that the law will negatively effect international relations and trade. Since there are all sorts of calls for boycotts of Arizonan products and several Mexican governors have refused to meet with Arizonan politicians, they’ll have no trouble making this last point.

There is also a legal precedent that has already been set regarding this issue. Do you remember back in '97 when Prop 187 here in Cal was struck by (if memory serves me correctly) the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals? The feds in that case cited the fact that the Supreme Court has already ruled that federal law trumps state law anytime federal interest outweighs state interest and where a federal system of regulations already exists. There weren’t even any appeals of this case.

So yes, there are legal precedents already set, there are statutes in place and there certainly have been cases (that the Feds won) that address this issue. And Holder will certainly touch this case. In fact, the Supreme Court is already planning on hearing a case regarding a 2007 law in Arizona that levied huge penalties against those who hired illegals (incidentally a major factor in the 33% decrease of the illegal immigrant population there).

I hope you’re right though. President Obama is already urging the ending of the 2007 Arizona law and I think this is a horrible decision he’s making. If it is struck down, it will be a huge precedental blow to the current Arizona law in question. But I don’t think your evaluation of this situation in regards to your above post is accurate at all. I wish it was, but you’re way off-base here.

64

To quote Justice Hugo Black from 1941, a quote that I believe has been inserted into the DOJ’s lawsuit:

“The supremacy of the national power in the general field of foreign affairs, including power over immigration, naturalization and deportation, is made clear by the Constitution, was pointed out by authors of The Federalist in 1787, and has since been given continuous recognition by this Court.”

65

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

Walls built to keep people out can also be used to keep people in.[/quote]

WTF kinda pseudo profundity was this supposed to be? If we built a wall on the Mexican border of course it would keep people OUT of the US and IN Mexico.

I hereby strike you from my nomination list for the highly sought Rhetorician of the Year award.
[/quote]

How appropriate. I struck you from my list of people whose rigid, unwavering, misinformed, unintelligent opinions I give a fuck about months ago. [/quote]

So, you’re concerned about the US government not letting us leave the country?[/quote]

Not really. But I’d think someone paranoid enough to think that what we need is to surround ourselves with a bunch of fucking walls wouldn’t think it’s a stretch to also think that at some point those walls would be used to keep us in. I’m not trying to lump anyone in particular into that category so please don’t think that I am implying that you (or Push for that matter) are paranoiacs.

Look, building a huge wall on the Mexican border wouldn’t make our problems any better. They might be different problems, but they’d still be big ones. This country would become the outcasts of the international community if we did something like that. I understand that some people don’t seem to give a flying fuck about our standing amongst the other nations on this planet, but that view is an ignorant departure from reality.

We’ve got a bunch of people calling for all sorts of boycotts of Arizonan products right now over the enforcement of a basic law. How loud do you think those cries for boycotts and so forth would become if we built a wall across the border? Don’t you think that all sorts of different countries would take issue with our wall-building and that these countries would take certain steps to “punish” in whatever way they deem necessary or possible if we did such a thing? I’m not sure I’d blame them either. Shit, look at the international furor over the wall-building in Israel.

Also, a huge part of the argument for the eradication of illegal immigrants (and a very, very valid one) is the fact that they are a huge economic burden on this country. But think about it. Building and maintaining that wall could potentially be just as big an economic burden. Given that the wall would spawn a whole new set of issues for us, it’s hardly an investment with a large potential for a significant return on it.

Those fucking Mexican cartels would have every incentive to sabotage the wall at every chance they could get. The repairs we’d need to do to the wall would be expensive and given how dangerous the border has already become due to all of these cartels, it would be a highly dangerous repair. The construction itself would be highly dangerous. We have people going apeshit because of the deaths of soldiers in Afghanistan fighting a legit enemy. Can you imagine the uproar if we started losing American lives in the process of building some Draconian wall across our southern border?

I’m sorry, but to think that if we can just go down and build a wall across the border w/o inviting a whole slew of new problems that have nothing to do with illegal immigration is extremely short-sighted and ignorant. Like it or not, we’d become international pariahs and again, like it or not it is ridiculous to think that we can exist in this world as such a pariah without some negative consequences that could very well outweigh whatever positive benefits may come along with ridding ourselves of these fucking anchor babies and illegal workers.

The solution is simple. We as a country need to create an environment in which there are no jobs, there is no education and no healthcare (outside of emergency care) available to undocumented workers, period. Despite the backwards fiscal policies of the Obama administration we are not going to become a third-world country anytime soon and Mexico certainly isn’t going to become an economic power, so there will always be a reason for Mexicans to come here for work. But they will come here legally and be forced to pay into the same pool that covers their social services/healthcare/education/etc that we all do if there is no chance they can get work w/o proper documentation. We depend heavily on the existence of cheap labor, but illegal cheap labor is slowly bankrupting us. If Mexicans couldn’t come here illegally and get a job, it’s not like they’d just stop coming. They’d simply come here legally.

How do we do this? We go after the people who hire illegals with fire and brimstone. It is they who create the incentive for them to come here illegally and it is they who reward illegal immigrants who come here illegally with jobs.[/quote]

While I think DB is an asshole , I have to agree with him on most of his points on this issue
[/quote]

Fuck. As correct as I feel I am with these points, I’m not sure it’s a good thing that a single-cell mongoloid like yourself agrees with me. Maybe I should re-evaluate my entire stance on the issue. I can’t wait for Push to denounce the validity my entire stance because of my “stupidity” in claiming that mongoloids literally only have one brain cell.[/quote]

I do not think your stupidity is in question I think the validity of your theory is .

67

Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).

68

[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).[/quote]

ANGRY MUTATED SEA BASS?

70

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

Fuck. As correct as I feel I am with these points, I’m not sure it’s a good thing that a single-cell mongoloid like yourself agrees with me. Maybe I should re-evaluate my entire stance on the issue. I can’t wait for Push to denounce the validity my entire stance because of my “stupidity” in claiming that mongoloids literally only have one brain cell.[/quote]

You can have him!

I agreed (and said so) with your points about removing the incentives that create illegal immigration.

I disagree with the hand wringing whine…“But I’m sooooo worried what the rest of the world will think…I wanna win popularity contests hither and yon…the French and the Venezuelans might quit liking us so much…”

Bottom line here is I think a combination of stronger security at the border and ending incentives would do the trick. One without the other won’t. The other without the one won’t work.

I think it’s completely ridiculous to assume a wall wouldn’t work because of the ability to tunnel under it. In fact it’s so stupid I can’t believe a guy like you would resort to that lame assumption. We have a completely open physical border right now to where a three year old or an 80 year old or thousands of 25 year olds can walk right in without missing a step AND THAT is the same deterrent as a wall like the one you described?

BTW, if you’re worried about tunnels maybe you engineered your wall footings too shallow.

Bottom line here is a wall would work gloriously well. And the cost might just be offset by the decreased spending on the social services that the illegals consume.[/quote]

I don’t wring my hands at all over the perception of us amongst other countries if we built a wall. I could give a shit what the French or Venezuelans might think of us. But I do understand that countries like theirs will have a problem with us building such a wall and that this will have a detrimental effect on us in many unpredictable ways. I’m not worried about thier opinions, only their actions.

And if you think tunnels under the walls is some sort of wild assumption on my part or that there aren’t people going under the border via tunnel right now, you’re sorely mistaken. I worked for several years for a landscaper who hired tons of illegals and you know what? Every single one of them had come across the border via tunnel at some point or another. If you think that building wall footings deeper is an acceptable solution to this problem, you’re more far-gone than even I thought was possible.

Who cares how open our border is if there’s no reason to cross it? Without the ability to find a job due to a lack of legit documentation and if the children of illegal immigrants born here were not automatically made citizens, there would be little reason for any Mexicans to cross illegally. Yes, drug trafficking would not apply in this case, but that’s a whole different set of issues with a far less comprehensive solution available that even your wall won’t begin to solve.

Also, given that social services are only a small percentage of the total cost of illegal immigration (1.5 billion out of 10.5 billion in California) the wall most likely won’t be a worthy financial expenditure. Education costs are the bulk of the cost (7.7 billion in California) and the solution to that problem requires no wall-building: children born here whose parents came here illegally are NOT made citizens, period. No citizenship, no free public education at the taxpayers’ expense and no women sneaking across (or under) the border in their third trimester.

Get with the times Push. If you can’t see foresee any significant problems arising from Mexican-American citizens here and/or from a large portion of the international community were we to build a wall, then your perceptiveness is so low as to make me question why I ever read any of your posts.

72

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).[/quote]

Thing is…no one anywhere is suggesting building a wall is enough.

NO.

ONE.

ANYWHERE.[/quote]

You said earlier that one can’t be done without the other and vice versa (walls and incentives) and still be effective. The example in Arizona, in which harsher penalties for those who hire illegals were enacted (and are now being fought by the DOJ) led to a huge decrease in the illegal immigrant population proves that one can be effective without the other. No one in Arizona is claiming that the 180,000 person drop in illegals was due to tighter border security. Virtually every legislator/politician there acknowledges that this drop was due to two things: the economic downturn (showing that a scarcity of jobs for illegals can curtail their immigration) and the implementation of harsher penalties for those who hire them.

It is dubious at best to think that a wall could have the same effect. We are already seeing the DOJ and various politicians turn the current law into a vastly polarizing issue; how bad do you think things would get if we built the wall? Every single border state politician and every Presidential candidate would turn the issue into a fucking litmus test like abortion is right now. Shit, if we built the wall today, who’s to say that at some point another administration wouldn’t come into power and immediately do everything in their power to remove it? We’re seeing some wacky policies being implemented right now so it’s no stretch at all to think that wouldn’t happen, especially if we ever have a President of Hispanic descent. Shit, if we had a Hispanic Presidential candidate, what do you think would be a major platform of his during his campaign?

73

[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).[/quote]

the same myopic view that lead us to this situation to begin with . . .

Border security is not an immigration problem - it is a national security problem.

Illegal immigration and border security - although connected - are not the same issue.

You can solve the problem of illegal immigrant workers coming into the US and that WILL NOT solve the border security issue. Vice Versa, you can solve the Border security issue and that will not solve the illegal alien issue.

Solving border security will close a single avenue of entry for illegal aliens - BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY - it will solve a national security crisis by removing this wide open highway from the use of those intending to harm the US and its citizens. By additional partnering with Mexico and Canada we can extend that national security protection into a hemispheric region, but the start has to be where we can affect the most progress and that is on our national borders!

National Security FIRST!

74

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).[/quote]

Thing is…no one anywhere is suggesting building a wall is enough.

NO.

ONE.

ANYWHERE.[/quote]

thing is… my point still stands, and the machine gun nests implies that the wall is manned

and besides that

Someone

Did

Somewhere

76

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

I don’t wring my hands at all over the perception of us amongst other countries if we built a wall… [/quote]

The text of your several posts indicates otherwise.

[/quote]

Sigh. The text of my posts indicate that I fully understand that we are perceived by other countries in many different ways. If every country thought we were a bunch of redneck, fascist, war mongers, I could give a shit about that, UNTIL their perception of us as those things lead to direct negative consequences for us. Again, actions worry me, not thoughts. And if you are incapable of understanding the difference then, in the words of DoubleDuce, this is our impasse.

79

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

…And if you think tunnels under the walls is some sort of wild assumption on my part or that there aren’t people going under the border via tunnel right now, you’re sorely mistaken. I worked for several years for a landscaper who hired tons of illegals and you know what? Every single one of them had come across the border via tunnel at some point or another. If you think that building wall footings deeper is an acceptable solution to this problem, you’re more far-gone than even I thought was possible…[/quote]

Tunnels would never be capable of serving as the sole conduits for the masses of illegals we see now. Never.[/quote]

You’re 100% correct on that one! If we built a wall, I’m sure that along with using tunnels, we’d see illegals coming by boat as well as some exotic means of smuggling.

80

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]Jfbalabama wrote:
Unfortunately building walls and machine gun nests or even moats filled with sharks with frickin lasers on there heads awesome as that shit might be isnt enough. The only real way to take care of the border situation is to end birthright citizenship, harsher punishment on individuals and businesses that hire illegals (treat it as treason it is after all aiding foreign invaders hang the fuckers who hire illegals),and end cobra laws (or atleast deny service to those who cant prove citizenship).[/quote]

Thing is…no one anywhere is suggesting building a wall is enough.

NO.

ONE.

ANYWHERE.[/quote]

You said earlier that one can’t be done without the other and vice versa (walls and incentives) and still be effective. The example in Arizona, in which harsher penalties for those who hire illegals were enacted (and are now being fought by the DOJ) led to a huge decrease in the illegal immigrant population proves that one can be effective without the other. No one in Arizona is claiming that the 180,000 person drop in illegals was due to tighter border security. Virtually every legislator/politician there acknowledges that this drop was due to two things: the economic downturn (showing that a scarcity of jobs for illegals can curtail their immigration) and the implementation of harsher penalties for those who hire them.

It is dubious at best to think that a wall could have the same effect. We are already seeing the DOJ and various politicians turn the current law into a vastly polarizing issue; how bad do you think things would get if we built the wall? Every single border state politician and every Presidential candidate would turn the issue into a fucking litmus test like abortion is right now. Shit, if we built the wall today, who’s to say that at some point another administration wouldn’t come into power and immediately do everything in their power to remove it? We’re seeing some wacky policies being implemented right now so it’s no stretch at all to think that wouldn’t happen, especially if we ever have a President of Hispanic descent. Shit, if we had a Hispanic Presidential candidate, what do you think would be a major platform of his during his campaign?[/quote]

Should we tear down our existing walls? If they are stupid, a joke, ineffective, should we tear them down? The one near San Ysidro would be an example.[/quote]

I answered that question for you last night. You’re dying a slow death here Push.