foreign countries sue AZ

[hackster]

When foreign nations have a say in our court system, and when foreign nations have the ability to be involved in lawsuits against a sovereign state of this country...

Then, do we not ALREADY HAVE global government?

Here 'tis-
"The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the nations of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Peru to file briefs against Arizona’s SB1070."

link:
Appeals court allows foreign nations to join federal suit against Arizona - National Immigration reform | Examiner.com

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

 

[Jetboogieman]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

FREAKOUT WORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
​

 

[liblady]

i don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says this really ****ing sucks and we wish you'd see it our way can be considered having "a say in our court system."

furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

i can't stand this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Arcana XV]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

 

[StandUpChuck]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

 

[jamesrage]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

Those are foreign countries as a such they should not have anything to with the lawsuit against Arizona regardless of how minute it is. How a state handles their illegal immigration problem is none of Mexicos, Argentina or any other countries business. regardless if it is a THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY. If they want to say disagree then get a newspaper to do it for them.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

:2party::2party:

 

[liblady]

i think it is.....

 

[tacomancer]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Those are foreign countries as a such they should not have anything to with the lawsuit against Arizona regardless of how minute it is. How a state handles their illegal immigration problem is none of Mexicos, Argentina or any other countries business. regardless if it is a THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY. If they want to say disagree then get a newspaper to do it for them.

How Arizona handles its illegal immigration problem absolutely is the business of the Federal government, and affects how the Federal government interacts with foreign governments on behalf of the United States. These nations have a measure of interest in the outcome of this case, and as such they are being permitted to express their opinion officially.

Not vote on the outcome, not even stand before the judges and argue -- just to file a piece of paper wherein they express their opinion.

Boo freaking hoo.

 

[jamesrage]

How Arizona handles its illegal immigration problem absolutely is the business of the Federal government, and affects how the Federal government interacts with foreign governments on behalf of the United States. These nations have a measure of interest in the outcome of this case, and as such they are being permitted to express their opinion officially.

Not vote on the outcome, not even stand before the judges and argue -- just to file a piece of paper wherein they express their opinion.

Boo freaking hoo.

What a load of globalist crap.Those judges should have told those countries to piss off,especially Mexico.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

What a load of globalist crap.Those judges should have told those countries to piss off,especially Mexico.

So let me get this straight.

When we go storming around the world, throwing our military might around and interfering in the internal affairs of other nations, we're spreading freedom and democracy.

When other nations simply wish to express their opinions on a matter that will have some impact on some of their citizens, that's "a load of globalist crap?"

Really?

Is that the best you can do? :lol:

 

[digsbe]

I don't think that being permitted to file a pile of papers that essentially says THIS REALLY ****ING SUCKS AND WE WISH YOU'D SEE IT OUR WAY can be considered having "a say in our court system."

Furthermore, if there was no federal suit, they'd have no forum in which to file their briefs.

So, um, yeah. Calm down. This is not something to have a rally over.

FRREEKOUT WORD!!!!11!1!!ONE1!!1!

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

God.

DAMN.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Whovian]

The thread title is misleading. This does not allow foreign nations to sue anyone.

However, the ability to file a brief in a legal matter in the US 'does' in effect give a foreign nation the ability to influence how a case is decided..

A brief (Latin "brevis", short) is a written legal document used in various legal adversarial systems that is presented to a court arguing why the party to the case should prevail.

That being said, I don't think this is a big deal.

 

[cpwill]

When foreign nations have a say in our court system, and when foreign nations have the ability to be involved in lawsuits against a sovereign state of this country...

Then, do we not ALREADY HAVE global government?

Here 'tis-
"The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the nations of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Peru to file briefs against Arizona’s SB1070."

link:
Appeals court allows foreign nations to join federal suit against Arizona - National Immigration reform | Examiner.com

in other news today, the Ninth Circuit Court has attempted to overthrow the soveriegnty of the people of the United States of America, and publicly (though tacitly) announced via this declaration that they deserved to be impeached at best and set on fire in the streets at worst.

this is insane. these people really truly should be impeached. if the US Federal government and the judiciary go along with this, i'm all in favor of Arizona reinstating the 10th Amendment and telling them all to go F themselves.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

You mean . . . invoking?

Besides, what the hell is Arizona going to do at the end of the day, go to war with the Feds? :lol:

 

[SgtRock]

You know whats ironic? The foreign countries involved in this have tougher immigration laws than the United States. In fact if you are caught entering illegally in those countries you go to prison. What gives them the right to file a brief in a US court. This is unprecedented and allows foreign nations to influence our legal system.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

It's hilarious how none of the people who are angry about this realize how ironic their outrage is. :lol:

 

[hackster]

So let me get this straight.

When we go storming around the world, throwing our military might around and interfering in the internal affairs of other nations, we're spreading freedom and democracy.

When other nations simply wish to express their opinions on a matter that will have some impact on some of their citizens, that's "a load of globalist crap?"

Really?

Is that the best you can do? :lol:

last i heard...
we (or at least AZ) were not forcing OBEYING THE LAW on anyone except those WITHIN the borders of subject country...

i am not alone in applauding AZ for such... more power to 'em.

if the US fed guvmint wants to sue or crybaby about enforcing our laws, that's bad enuff...
but when foreign nations jump on obamma's bandwagon and want to crybaby about law enforcement as well... TOUGH.

maybe we all who want the laws enforced jus' need to go OUTSIDE the country as well, and line up some other foreign intersts who will back us up...
and we'll let the chips fall where they may...

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I think you misunderstand the position Arizona is in.

Border control is not now, nor has it ever been, an issue which fell within the scope of the rights of the individual states to address. As a matter of fact, it's pretty explicitly denied to the states and reserved for the Feds.

The people of Arizona are certainly entitled to feel like the Feds have fallen down on the job, because the Feds have fallen down on the job -- and quite on purpose. What law enforcement tasks the Feds take seriously, they go overboard with. What law enforcement tasks the Feds do not feel like taking seriously, they do what they can to ignore while simultaneously putting on a show about how they actually do take it seriously.

The law of the land, which is to say the Constitution, does not give the state of Arizona much in the way of relief except through the court system. The fact that Arizona ignored this fact and attempted to usurp a portion of the authority of the Federal government to regulate the border is why it found itself in Federal court.

These nations aren't submitting briefs at Obama's invitation, nor did Obama have any influence over the decision to permit these briefs to be submitted. It was a decision made by a panel of judges that Obama have a hand in appointing.

As for this bit of absurdity:

maybe we all who want the laws enforced jus' need to go OUTSIDE the country as well, and line up some other foreign intersts who will back us up...
and we'll let the chips fall where they may...

By all means, leave the country and return at the head of a foreign military body bent on invading the United States of America.

Because high treason is of course the most appropriate response to the situation. :lol:

 

[mike2810]

TDan: "Border control is not now, nor has it ever been, an issue which fell within the scope of the rights of the individual states to address."
Explain to me how AZ1070 has the State controling the border (which I agree is a federal responsibility)? It does make it illegal to be in Arizona if you are in the US illegally. Why shouldn't a State have the authority to say if you are in the US illegally, it is illegal to be in Arizona?

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

The state doesn't have the authority to do what it was attempting to do because it what it was attempting to do went far beyond your over-simplified characterization.

Dot.