|
|
| Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN (952746) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
| (952746) | |
Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012 Details forthcoming....the wire said most of the law is struck down. |
|
|
| (952752) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:32:29 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. There are also rulings state's right to limit campaign funding and juvenile detention but no details yet. Apparently no healthcare today, so America get to remain healthy another day. |
|
|
| (952753) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:32:47 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. There are also rulings state's right to limit campaign funding and juvenile detention but no details yet. Apparently no healthcare today, so America gets to remain healthy another day. |
|
|
| (952754) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by DaNd124 on Mon Jun 25 10:36:11 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. from the SCOTUSblog live blog:Amy Howe: As part of Scalia's statement in dissent, he is commenting on the president's announcement about suspending deportation of illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children -- something that was not part of the case. |
|
|
| (952759) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:51:07 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:32:47 2012. They struck down the Montana law that limited campaign contributions by corporations.IT was 5-4 http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/06/25/us/politics/ap-us-supreme-court-campaign-finance-montana.html |
|
|
| (952760) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:51:09 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:32:47 2012. They struck down the Montana law that limited campaign contributions by corporations.http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/06/25/us/politics/ap-us-supreme-court-campaign-finance-montana.html |
|
|
| (952768) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:59:04 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:51:09 2012. Juveniles cannot be sentenced to life without parole. Another 5-4 but one that turned out right. All over the world, kids get to have another chance. Now America has joined the civilized world on this one. |
|
|
| (952779) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Jun 25 11:14:29 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. The Supreme Court upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law in a 5-3 decision on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona. Other parts of the law, including a provision that made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work, will remain blocked, as the justices affirmed the federal government's supremacy over immigration policy.Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote, wrote the opinion, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Conservative Justices Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas partially dissented, saying the entire law should have been upheld. In the opinion, Justice Kennedy wrote that the federal government's "power to determine immigration policy is well settled." But he also showed concern for what he described as Arizona's outsize burden in dealing with illegal immigration, seeming to sympathize with their decision to butt in on immigration enforcement. "Arizona bears many of the consequences of unlawful immigration," he wrote. "Hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens are apprehended in Arizona each year." But, ultimately, the justices found that Arizona can not mete out their own state punishments for federal immigration crimes. "Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law," Kennedy writes in the opinion's conclusion. The police immigration checks are allowed, however, because state police would simply flag federal authorities if they find an illegal immigrant. The Obama administration sued to block Arizona's law, called SB1070, shortly after it passed two years ago, saying it interfered with federal authority over immigration. The law made it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work or fail to carry proper immigration papers. It also requires police officers to check immigration status and make warrantless arrests for immigration crimes in some cases. A federal judge prevented those aspects of the law from going into effect, but the law became a lightning rod around the country, sparking boycotts and counter-boycotts and opening up a debate about the nation's illegal immigrant population. In oral arguments in April, many of the justices seemed deeply skeptical of the government's argument that local police officers would interfere with federal authority over immigration law they began asking people about their immigration status during stops. Though much of the debate around the law has focused on "racial profiling"--whether Hispanic people would be stopped and questioned by police based on their ethnicity--the government did not even mention those words in their case against the law, instead focusing on the federal government's supremacy in immigration matters. Justices repeatedly criticized the government's argument against immigration checks. Even Sonia Sotomayor, part of the court's liberal wing, said she was "terribly confused" by the government's argument against the checks. But the liberal justices showed much more hesitation over the parts of the law that made federal immigration crimes into state crimes, which have all now been struck down. Sotomayor singled out the state law against illegal immigrants seeking work, noting that Congress had explicitly rejected a similar law in their immigration legislation, instead choosing to target employers who hire unauthorized workers. . |
|
|
| (952785) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 11:34:47 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Jun 25 11:14:29 2012. You didn't read the decision. They can ask but cannot act upon any information unless they arrest for a significant crime. The decision also struck down the requirement to carry papers at all times as well, so the entire issue is moot. The court also stated that they expect to see additional challenges to the upheld provisions. It's as if they made a stupid, by their own admission, compromise in order to effectively strike down the whole thing. |
|
|
| (952808) | |
Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:46:20 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. 3 provisions were invalidated on the ground of federalism. They weren't overturned, they simply said it's the federal governments job to enforce those laws. One provision was affirmed, that being allowing the police to check immigration status as they do for other things, like criminal records or warrants. That's a HUGE victory for border security advocates.It's now harder to be an illegal immigrant in AZ today than it was yesterday. |
|
|
| (952812) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:50:50 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by DaNd124 on Mon Jun 25 10:36:11 2012. Howe is wrong. Federal vs. state powers to enforce immigration laws was a critical element of the case. You need to be a little more critical of what you read. |
|
|
| (952813) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 25 12:51:01 2012, in response to Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:46:20 2012. Thats what it sounded like to me too....but apparently the usual leftist extremists are doing their usual spin.... |
|
|
| (952814) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:54:12 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Jun 25 12:51:01 2012. Journalists, even liberal ones are frantically tweeting that this was no victory for those protecting illegal immigrants and that they should cease declaring victory in what is essentially a loss. |
|
|
| (952815) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 12:57:15 2012, in response to Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:46:20 2012. They are NOT allowed to arrest for immigration violations. They are not allowed to ask for papers, nor is anyone required to carry them.The only significant action they can do is check immigration status on suspects arrested for actual crime. That is the only point where that stupid law has any teeth. Immigration enforcement is the Federal government's job. This affirms it. |
|
|
| (952816) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 12:59:33 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:54:12 2012. It is NO victory for states usurping Federal jurisdictions. It was never about"protecting illegal immigrants". What jackass spinned this to that? Faux hotair? |
|
|
| (952817) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:00:39 2012, in response to Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:46:20 2012. 1 of for provisions upheld for now. The 4th is still open to future challenge if AZ happens to unduly single out people who speak Spanish, for example. |
|
|
| (952821) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:04:06 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:50:50 2012. It was the ONLY element of this case.They only allowed Arizona to "check". They aren't allowed to do anything beyond that. |
|
|
| (952822) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:06:51 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 12:57:15 2012. They are NOT allowed to arrest for immigration violations.You misunderstand (as usual). They are reserving that power for the federal government. They aren't stopping said arrests, they are saying state law enforcement officials cannot make them. SB1070 specifically gave local law enforcement the power to enforce said law and the SCOTUS said the feds have primacy. |
|
|
| (952823) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:07:36 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:00:39 2012. You can challenge anything. It's now the law of the state. |
|
|
| (952824) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:09:07 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 12:59:33 2012. It is NO victory for states usurping Federal jurisdictionsWell yeah, that's the point. It was never about"protecting illegal immigrants". There you go again. Time for your afternoon pills. |
|
|
| (952825) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:09:36 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:00:39 2012. That's right. They even said so in the decision. It's as if they made some variety of bad compromise to effectively overturn the whole thing, |
|
|
| (952826) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:13:59 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:59:04 2012. A state can't make life without parole mandatory. A judge can still impose that sentence. |
|
|
| (952827) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:15:41 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:13:59 2012. NOt anymore. |
|
|
| (952828) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:16:09 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:07:36 2012. Until the first US citizen who only speaks Spanish gets wrongfully detained. |
|
|
| (952829) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:17:37 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:59:04 2012. Indeed. It told Montana it cannot arbitrarily limit someone's free speech rights:http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-1179h9j3.pdf |
|
|
| (952830) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:19:04 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 12:54:12 2012. The US specifically didn't bring up equal enforcement. This issue is still open. |
|
|
| (952831) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:19:52 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:19:04 2012. Read the majority decision. At it's heard is the federalism charge. |
|
|
| (952832) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:21:45 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:16:09 2012. No, until hundreds do and none speaking French do. You need a pattern, and one doesn't exist with a single example.It will be hard for people to assert profiling if the process is applied to all those involved. That a majority speak Spanish won't be relevant unless someone shows that other immigrant groups are not being treated the same. |
|
|
| (952833) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:22:37 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:06:51 2012. You did not understand. Local AZ law enforcement is limited to checking immigration status of suspects. They are NOT allowed to act on that information. They are NOT allowed to arrest anyone for being in the country illegally.So let's say for argument's sake (although this will never happen).... You are driving a carload of illegal immigrants who are in AZ to pick strawberries. You are caught speeding. You get a ticket. The end. Nothing more can happen as your passengers are not required to carry papers (you forgot about THAT important piece of the decision) nor do they have to answer the police per the 5th Amendment. Even if they answer the police and provide names or ID if requested, they cannot arrest them. or do anything, as they have not broken any AZ laws. |
|
|
| (952835) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:23:35 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:06:51 2012. You misunderstand (as usual). They are reserving that power for the federal government. They aren't stopping said arrests, they are saying state law enforcement officials cannot make them.In other words, if the federal government decides to look the other way or isn't doing an adequate job (the driving force behind the Arizona law), the state isn't allowed to act as enforcer. |
|
|
| (952836) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:24:06 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:23:35 2012. Exactly. |
|
|
| (952837) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:24:35 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:17:37 2012. That was the ONE thing they did that was WRONG. For all the RW babble about states rights, it seems that only applies anyone who is not a corporation or a white male. |
|
|
| (952838) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:25:50 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:24:35 2012. There is no state right to ignore Supreme Court precedent. |
|
|
| (952840) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:28:49 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:25:50 2012. IIRC, the Montana law preceeded Citizens |
|
|
| (952841) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 25 13:30:40 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:17:37 2012. The decision you hate was also decided properly. The 4th Amendment applies; the dissenters were all conservatives. |
|
|
| (952842) | |
Re:SCOTUS did something right today |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:32:30 2012, in response to Re:SCOTUS did something right today, posted by AMoreira81 on Mon Jun 25 13:30:40 2012. I am not arguing with it, I am simply trying to get some to define it properly. I always knew it was a stretch that the court would allow the state jurisdiction where the feds have had it for decades. |
|
|
| (952843) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jun 25 13:33:02 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 12:57:15 2012. Awesome, now you're allowed to go to very safe Arizona without any fear, and no need to carry any ID on your person at all, for any reason.So next time a bank teller, librarian, cop..i mean pig, or apartment leasing agent asks for your papers, tell them to gfy. |
|
|
| (952845) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jun 25 13:34:15 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by alm on Mon Jun 25 13:00:39 2012. "The 4th is still open to future challenge if AZ happens to unduly single out people who speak Spanish, for example. "What else would you be speaking? And I'm hoping for no absurdities that are consistant with subchat, ie. Arizona is the deep south, and no californians move nor live in Texas type of nonsense. |
|
|
| (952847) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:38:15 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by orange blossom special on Mon Jun 25 13:34:15 2012. I'm sure there are plenty of English speaking illegals in AZ. They learn it in schools. They may be here illegally, but that doesn't make them illiterate or uneducated. |
|
|
| (952850) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Dutchrailnut on Mon Jun 25 13:39:22 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 11:34:47 2012. The article I posted is official release, you care to say its wrong ?? |
|
|
| (952854) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:41:17 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 11:34:47 2012. Which is the FEDERAL law. That law is still in effect. Learn to read. |
|
|
| (952857) | |
Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:43:20 2012, in response to Re: Wrong: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:09:07 2012. I was quoting you, jackass. |
|
|
| (952860) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by LuchAAA on Mon Jun 25 13:48:06 2012, in response to Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 10:27:12 2012. so is the boycott over? |
|
|
| (952866) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 25 13:55:45 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by LuchAAA on Mon Jun 25 13:48:06 2012. Yep, we can all buy Arizona Ice Tea again.your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (952868) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by bingbong on Mon Jun 25 13:56:30 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 25 13:55:45 2012. Yay! Though Lipton's is much better. |
|
|
| (952870) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:57:30 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 13:41:17 2012. Which is the FEDERAL law. That law is still in effect.Just as it was in effect before the Arizona law. The STATE law was struck down. |
|
|
| (952871) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:58:30 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 25 13:55:45 2012. Yep, we can all buy Arizona Ice Tea again.I'm going to listen to the Mark Lindsay song as soon as I get home. |
|
|
| (952874) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 14:01:02 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:57:30 2012. That's what I said and meant. The state law giving the state the power to enforce a law which the feds have supremacy on was invalidated. The laws still criminalizing said behavior still exists, it's just federal, not state. |
|
|
| (952877) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Jun 25 14:04:59 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Mon Jun 25 14:01:02 2012. The laws still criminalizing said behavior still exists, it's just federal, not state. Who said otherwise? |
|
|
| (952878) | |
Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Mon Jun 25 14:06:01 2012, in response to Re: Arizona immigration STRUCK DOWN, posted by RIPTA42HopeTunnel on Mon Jun 25 13:58:30 2012. Good idea. I'm gonna watch Raising Arizonayour pal, Fred |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|