AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Free Dating

Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

posted 7/28/2010 2:47:20 PM |
0 kudosgive kudos what's this?
    report abuse
  somnium

Apparently, Arizona must have bruised Obama's ego on the immigration issue going on! Sure it's about Federal responsibility to secure our borders but, when is Obama going to get off his skinny ass and enforce the laws already in place about illegal immigration?? What is the ruling judge getting out of this rule??

Typical political posturing if you ask me- to the extent that the previous administrations and now this administration, are playing political football over something that is a direct threat to our citizens! With the drug cartel getting more dangerous at our Southern borders, wouldn't that become even more evident, that those people should be considered terrorists... I mean with stepping up their violence using car bombs now??

When is Obama going to wake up and smell the shit that's going on around our Southern borders... when the violence spills over into the Arizona/Texas cities further North and beyond?? Stupid politicians!!!


Ruling article


Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)

   read more blogs!

Blogs by somnium:
For M*A*S*H lovers back then:
FYI... Web Photos That Reveal Secrets, Like Where You Live
Some useful tips to emphasize selected text
Stem Cells Rebuild Bone, Cartilage
Help support NASA... build your own satellite to go into orbit!
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law
Backwards Pianist Takes his Music to a New Level
Commercial spacecraft makes first crewed flight
Dreamliner makes first overseas landing
For those interested: 18th-century ship found at WTC site


Comments:

post a comment!

everyonesvalentine

Jul 28 @ 4:12PM  
africa wants immortal revenge for the 'exploration of africa' and its seizing
which even tarzan could not stop. the united nations supported native indigenous
rule. same with the americas. they gave all the land back to the indians.
european americans and all others, african americans, asian americans were
given till 1964 to leave and turn all that they had illegally gained and stolen
back to native americans. we we are the illegal aliens. and we are 46 years late
in leaving and going back to where we came from.
theSkwirl

Jul 28 @ 4:48PM  
Did I hear someone mention digging an aligator filled moat?
ma47

Jul 28 @ 7:04PM  
Larry the Cable Guy,,,,talked about the moat
KitKat25

Jul 28 @ 7:14PM  
I'm so mad I could just spit nails.

Why you ask? Because when my family immigrated to Canada we were not given any special treatment and in fact...were told how we could expect to get zero special treatment since "my government" would expect school fees and such if a parent was enrolling their child in a U.S. school. Yeah...riiiiiiight.

It didn't matter that we had ALL the required paperwork and legal documents...oh no! I can't tell you how many times I heard this same horseshit. And at the time...I knew illegal immigrants were being allowed to attend public school free of charge.

Yes...I know this is just once side to all of this mess...but this is the side that really chaffs my ass big time! S***! Damn! F***!

Oh...and here is something I found that just shows how stupid the powers that be are acting with this one area alone.

School attendance is generally a federal law with regard to minors, however, individual States can and do pass legislation that interprets this. If you home-school your children, they are still being educated (I presume) and many states that allow home-schooling have mandatory testing of these home-schooled students. In regards to illegal immigrants and their undocumented children:

In 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Plyler vs. Doe [457 U.S. 202 (1982)] that undocumented children and young adults have the same right to attend public primary and secondary schools as do U.S. citizens and permanent residents. Like other children, undocumented students are required under state laws to attend school until they reach a legally mandated age.

As a result of the Plyler ruling, public schools may not:

* deny admission to a student during initial enrollment or at any other time on the basis of undocumented status;
* treat a student differently to determine residency;
* engage in any practices to ?chill? the right of access to school;
* require students or parents to disclose or document their immigration status;
* make inquiries of students or parents that may expose their undocumented status; or
* require social security numbers from all students, as this may expose undocumented status.

Students without social security numbers should be assigned a number generated by the school. Adults without social security numbers who are applying for a free lunch and/or breakfast program for a student need only state on the application that they do not have a social security number.

Recent changes in the F-1 (student) Visa Program do not change the Plyler rights of undocumented children. These changes apply only to students who apply for a student visa from outside the United States and are currently in the United States on an F-1 visa.

Also, the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) prohibits schools from providing any outside agency ? including the Immigration and Naturalization Service ? with any information from a child?s school file that would expose the student?s undocumented status without first getting permission from the student?s parents. The only exception is if an agency gets a court order (subpoena) that parents can then challenge. Schools should note that even requesting such permission from parents might act to ?chill? a student?s Plyler rights.

Finally, school personnel ? especially building principals and those involved with student intake activities ? should be aware that they have no legal obligation to enforce U.S. immigration laws.

Can you say MORONS?!?!

Please delete my previous comment. Don't you just hate typos?
Wordsofwit

Jul 28 @ 8:20PM  
Can you say MORONS?!?!

Whine, bitch, moan, and misunderstand what it means...how about that! Ignorance is not necessarily bliss!

Can you say people not understanding the issue?

These are legal issues in a federal court involving states rights in a conflict of a state law over riding federal law based upon the constitutionality of a law passed by a state, Period.
LuuvaGrl

Jul 28 @ 8:35PM  
This is just one in a sequence of events that is leading up to a Global Governance....it's coming...weather we like it or not.....
StraddleMyNose

online now!
Jul 28 @ 9:58PM  
Whine, bitch, moan, and misunderstand what it means...how about that! Ignorance is not necessarily bliss!

Can you say people not understanding the issue?
I don't think there was any misunderstanding on her part. Ignorance seems to be thrown around a lot by a few who don't agree with others on the issue.

Arizona has every right to pass laws that are very simular to federal laws. Obama and his Attorney General really should have stayed the fuck out of that states business, especially when the federal government won't enforce current laws and guidelines.

The idiot judge needs the much needed flack that she deserves after what voters passed with their election recently in their state. The woman is a total moron in my opinion and blocked three key ingredients of this law that needed to be succussful with.

I do expect Arizona to be the victor at the end of this journey however with the U.S. Supreme Court.

As for what I think of this judge...
theSkwirl

Jul 28 @ 10:00PM  
Oh, I know this is gonna be popular. I'm just about for Global Governance. Everyone living by the same rules.. makes sense to me as long as the Governance is up to date on human rights.
somnium

Jul 28 @ 10:03PM  
These are legal issues in a federal court involving states rights in a conflict of a state law over riding federal law based upon the constitutionality of a law passed by a state, Period.

Agreed... to a point! Seems that whatever the government is trying to accomplish for or against the citizens of this country, it's unconstitutional, if what they (the politicians) are trying to accomplish, meets with resistance... in their minds- yet, bypass the constitution, if it gets in their way!

This is what I meant about our government using this as a political football!

IMO, what Arizona and some other states are saying is that, if this issue is supposed to be in the control of the feds and that the feds have laws already in place, to protect our borders, then why aren't they and haven't been for decades??

From what I can gather, Arizona's SB 1070 law, is not meant to circumvent federal law but, to enforce the laws already on the books that the federal government should be enforcing but isn't! It's ironic that the government is so concerned about the rights of non citizens of our country without mentioning that when it comes to federal identification purposes, they're going to stomp on people's toes by prying into their lives anyway they can to get what they want, whether a citizen likes it or not!

Identification is used throughout our lives, whether we're pulled over by a cop, applying for a loan, writing a large check- hell, many institutions ask for our SS # which as far as I know, was never meant to be! So, I don't see a problem if a cop pulls a car over for some infraction and ask for identification! If ID can't be presented by the 25 people stuffed in one vehicle, well... that's grounds for suspicion... isn't it??

This has much more to do with political juxtaposition, than our immigration problems! Heh... makes me wonder, how many votes they (politicians) receive from undocumented voters, while looking the other way!


KitKat25

Jul 28 @ 10:59PM  
Whine, bitch, moan, and misunderstand what it means...how about that! Ignorance is not necessarily bliss!

Can you say people not understanding the issue?


I KNOW exactly what this blog is about. I CHOSE to base my comment on a SPECIFIC area that impacted me and my family personally. Was it a bit off topic? Perhaps...but it still fits into the topic of illegal immigrants receiving benefits and privileges they shouldn't be receiving because they don't have the proper status. Oh...and I'm far from ignorant Bruce.
justme4u

Jul 29 @ 4:40AM  
Hes afraid to do anything. He doesnt want to lose his votes in the future. Even the peps who dont belong here vote with thier fake id's. If they are still hee he gets thier votes
justme4u

Jul 29 @ 4:41AM  
Did you read the news. They are all leaving Arizona and now they have jobs open. What does that tell you??????
somnium

Jul 29 @ 7:58AM  
Did you read the news. They are all leaving Arizona and now they have jobs open. What does that tell you??????

Well... one thing it tells me, is that Arizona has inadvertently discovered a way to cause the undocumented immigrants to leave without us having to use resources to find and deport them!

We just need the other three states bordering Mexico, to copy Arizona's law... problem solved!


Wordsofwit

Jul 29 @ 8:08AM  
When you get beyond the federal versus state legal issues and the problem of illegal immigrants, I see it being kind of interesting in what happens in Arizona in a different light.

But first, I digress. I wanted to corroborate my point, so I went to this site. I found it interesting that there are only 15 counties in the state. In 2005 there was an estimated 5,939,292 residents in the state, 3,635,528 of these reside in one county, Maricopa.

Anyway, when you get beyond metropolitan Phoenix and Tucson, it is very much small town rural expanses. How will law enforcement in these areas elect to enforce the new law if at all?

Many of the areas are not affluent and have small, tight municipal and county budgets. Are they really interested in shelling out for the cost of transporting and incarcerating a Mexican who is quite likely to just be passing through on his way to Phoenix, LA or Chicago?

I can easily see how the rural police and sheriffs will find this to be a real pain to actively enforce as it takes time away from focusing on other crimes and nabbing speeders to write tickets for revenues. I would not be surprised to see a blind eye turned, especially if illegals are not a problem in their area beyond passing through in route to somewhere else.
Wordsofwit

Jul 29 @ 8:26AM  
Did you read the news. They are all leaving Arizona and now they have jobs open.

Of course I have. But I haven't really seen anything about that in the way it is expressed. But if I was from Sonora visiting without a visa, I would definitely be considering ways to vacation elsewhere. You wouldn't happen to have a link to share with us so we read about it would you?

I went to the Arizona Republic site just now and, of course, there is coverage of the events. There is a blurb about illegals "hunkering down". But I did see this story and it doesn't instill much confidence in law enforcement rounding up violators, especially in Phoenix.
sugarnspice005

Jul 29 @ 8:38AM  
You hit it on the head with "political posturing". Federal Government is pissed off at State Government for making them look inept.

And while this goes on...the drug cartel in Mexico is reaching into U.S. territory in their little "wars", and, I had heard, on my local news, a while back about that same cartel putting out a "hit" on a Sheriff's life in Arizona. So, now we have someone from Mexico threatening the life of a law enforcement officer here in America. So...tell me....what is Gov. Brewer and the President supposed to do? Aren't BOTH responsible for the safety of the citizens of their state AND country?

I wasn't in that judges courtroom to hear exactly what she blocked, or her reasons. But I do know that while these two Government bodies are playing the typical political tug of war over this issue that drug cartel down there is most likely loving it knowing they can get away with more shit while all of this is going down.

I supported the bill when I first heard about it, and I still support it now. And I don't believe it should have been blocked in any way, shape, or form.
Wordsofwit

Jul 29 @ 9:24AM  
I don't believe it should have been blocked in any way, shape, or form.

That illustrates one of my points. I never said that I was opposed to the law. If not enforced with heavy handedness and abused, I actually think that the intent of the law is a good idea.

But that is all irrelevant. The court decision is about the legality of the law based upon the Constitution regardless of the issues involved in the law in question. There are many scholars who cite states rights versus federal jurisdiction as the main cause of the Civil War, not slavery per se. It raises constitutional issues and, to me, the smart money is bet on this issue going all the way to the Supreme Court.
Wordsofwit

Jul 29 @ 9:39AM  
Aren't BOTH responsible for the safety of the citizens of their state AND country?

I am not going to look this up as older news is kind of hard to find, but as I recall, within the last week or two, I read where a sizable number of National Guard troops have now deployed by the feds to hot spots on the border to address the specific issue of the violence in Mexico spilling over into US border towns. Of course, that mission translates out into drug traffic and illegal immigration also. Obviously, there are a lot of converging issues involved in all of this.
somnium

Jul 29 @ 10:32AM  
There are many scholars who cite states rights versus federal jurisdiction as the main cause of the Civil War,

"The American Civil War (1861–1865), amongst other names also known as the War Between the States, was a civil war in the United States of America. Eleven Southern slave states declared their secession from the United States and formed the Confederate States of America, also known as "the Confederacy". Led by Jefferson Davis, they fought against the United States (the Union), which was supported by all the free states and generally by the five border slave states."

Wikipedia-

Perhaps! If that was the case (scholar's opinions) than for a civil war to erupt with 'slavery' at the roots of the war- that was a good thing!

But this 'war' is different- we have bad guys doing bad things and has already caused the life of an American citizen Robert Krentz albeit by a suspected illegal immigrant and there are other incidents as well- with the government doing little about it!


Wordsofwit

Jul 29 @ 12:52PM  
Let me put a different spin on this law and what it means for local law enforcement in rural areas by creating a scenario that is bound to happen frequently.

Now every time a sheriff in the middle of nowhere (most of the state) pulls over a car occupied by Hispanics that don't speak English very well and there is one guy in the back seat who forgot to bring his wallet, guess what sheriff Andy has to do, by law? Yep, put the guy in the back seat of the cruiser and take a long drive back to sheriff's office. Police cars are known for being wonderfully fuel efficient and gasoline is really cheap these days, right? Now remember, there only 15 counties in the state of Arizona and it is not a small state geographically.
JsGirl69

Jul 29 @ 2:32PM  
How will law enforcement in these areas elect to enforce the new law if at all?
They wont.Damnit.I know this because the grossly overpopulated Orange Groves next door show no hint whatsoever of being abandoned.......
*loads long range sniper rifle*
JsGirl69

Jul 29 @ 2:33PM  
Just a part of this Obamanation,i guess....
prevert69

Jul 30 @ 4:34PM  
Let me get this right.... the Feds say the States can not enforce Federal immigration laws it's the Feds job .....so does that mean the States do not have to enforce enforce Federal drug laws? Or any Federal law ?

free dating | mission statement | testimonials | safety warning | report abuse | safe list | privacy | legal | 2257 | advertise | link to us

© Copyright 2000-2014 Online Singles, LLC.
OS-WEB01
Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law