[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
U.S. Constitution Title: Judge Blocks Parts Of Arizona Immigration Law PHOENIX (AP) -- A judge has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona's new immigration law from taking effect Thursday, handing a major legal victory to opponents of the crackdown. The law will still take effect Thursday, but without many of the provisions that angered opponents - including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton put those controversial sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Opponents say the law will lead to racial profiling and is trumped by federal immigration law. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 30. The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, Typical Clinton Appointee ignoramus. Federal law has for decades required all immigrants to carry their immigration papers on them and present them to LEOs upon request. What a dumb bitch this woman is.
#6. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#2) Federal law has for decades required all immigrants to carry their immigration papers on them and present them to LEOs upon request. Can Arizona pass the federal budget?
#9. To: war (#6) Federal law has for decades required all immigrants to carry their immigration papers on them and present them to LEOs upon request. Can a state LEO make an arrest for a violation of a federal law such as a Class III firearm?
#11. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#9) Yep. Do you know why?
#12. To: war (#11) Yep. Because it's against the law? Why not share with us, okay?
#13. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#12) (Edited) Because it's against the law? Provisions under the US Code pertaining to firearms allow local authorities to enforce criminal provisions of it. No such empowerment exists in immigration law. Nor is it a "crime" for someone to be here undocumented. It does make them subject to detention and deportation.
#15. To: war (#13) No such empowerment exists in immigration law. Nor is it a "crime" for someone to be here undocumented. It does make them subject to detention and deportation. It's a misdemeanor. You know that. I bring your attention to this pdf: http://trac.syr.edu/immigration/library/P48.pdf Their contention is that it is permissible for local LEOs to inquire about immigration status.
#16. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#15) (Edited) It's a misdemeanor. You know that. Illegal entry is a misdemeanor. Being here is a civil/adminstrative violation.
#17. To: war (#16) Illegal entry is a misdemeanor. Being here is a civil/adminstrative violation. I don't know about that. I know in California there is a law which says when you go out you have to present ID, immigrant or citizen to a LEO. This sounds like the Judge had a political axe to grind like Felzer did in 1994. To do so in California (not have id) means you go to jail.
#19. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#17) You have to have ID just about every where... Freedom...
#27. To: war (#19) You have to have ID just about every where... So citizens have to prove their identity, but illegals don't. Thanks for the clarification.
#30. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#27) So citizens have to prove their identity, but illegals don't. Identity and immigration/citizenship status are two different issues. But you know that.
Replies to Comment # 30. There are no replies to Comment # 30.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 30. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|