- Joined
- Nov 7, 2010
- Messages
- 7,676
- Reaction score
- 2,850
- Location
- Your Head
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
The court left standing only the "check your papers" part of the law that requires state and local police to perform roadside immigration checks of people they've stopped or detained if a "reasonable suspicion" exists they are in the country illegally.
The court indicated that that would face further scrutiny.
The court rejected the parts of the law that making it a state crime for illegal immigrants not to possess their federal registration cards; for illegal imigrants to work, apply for work or solicit work; and a section that allowed state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant when probable cause exists that they committed "any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States."
No word yet on what it is, but that ruling is in...links to follow when it hits the web.
1 of 4 previsions upheld...still no links. The one that is left is allowing police to arrest possible illegal immigrants if they are stopped for another crime. That must be reheard by the 9th.
The Supreme Court has issued 5-3 decision in favor of U.S. government, with Justice Kennedy saying that the government has significant power to regulate immigration and while Arizona may have signifacnt frustrations they may not have policies that undermine federal law.
wait, SCOTUS decided that its unConstitutionsal for there to be a state law making it illegal for unlawful immigrants to work?
they are saying that illegal aliens have the right to work in the USA???
They didn't do that.
At least police can still verify the legal status of those they pull over for traffic offense.Hopefully Arizona goes back to the drawing board for other ideas on cracking down on illegal immigration. I would like to see these ideas implemented.
1.Mandate E-verify.
2.Make those who hire illegals subject to the same laws that drug dealers,mobsters and other criminals who profit from and or use their money for illegals activities are subject to. That means subject to assets seizure and fortifier and prison time.
3.Make those who have been convicted of hiring illegals permanently loose business licenses and for a certain period of time be barred from getting a business license.
4.Require that in order to get and renew a state issued ID or state issued driver's license or federal government ID(military ID for example) one needs to present a birth certificate(or certificate of naturalization) and SS card.
6.Require that in order to enroll and re-enroll children into school the parents must present a state issued ID or driver's license. The parent must also present birth certificates and ss cards to enroll their kids into school. Schools failing to do this shall be fined and the appropriate people fired and or face possible jail or prison time.
7.Require banks,check cashing services and money wiring services to verify that the customer has a state issued ID or driver's license.
8.Require that in order to apply for welfare,food stamps, section 8 housing, tax payer funded education grants/aid, or any form of tax payer funded aid you must present a state issued ID or driver's license.
9.Require that in order to get a business license, food handlers permit,fishing and hunting permit or any other tax payer funded service you must present a state issued ID or driver's license.
10.Require that in order to buy,lease,sell,give or borrow a car both parties must state issued driver's license.
11.Require that in order to rent,sell,buy,give or borrow property/housing both parties much present a state issued ID or driver license.
12.Require police to verify the legal status of anyone they pull over.If they can spend a few seconds of minutes to check if someone has warrants then they can most definitely check to see if someone is here legally.
13.Require that those who deliberately aid illegals shall be fined and or thrown into prison,unless they are aiding in returning an illegal to the border.
oh, I thought that is what this...meant:
The court rejected the parts of the law that making it a state crime for illegal immigrants not to possess their federal registration cards; for illegal imigrants to work, apply for work or solicit work; and a section that allowed state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant when probable cause exists that they committed "any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States."
Now I'm confused on one aspect of this legislation.
Are the police able to stop anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant and force a citizen check, or can they only do that based on a traffic violation?
I would scrap that whole idea. There are better ways of handling this then stopping every Hispanic person and forcing a citizen check because lets be honest with each other...that is exactly what will happen. A cop will see a Hispanic man or woman driving...pull them over on some botched traffic violation that would otherwise have been looked over and ask for their documents. It is a slippery slope to do this and really gives validation to those who claim we're in a police-state.
NBC News is reporting the only aspect of the law upheld is that the provision that an immigration check must be made before someone that has been arrested (on other matters) can be released. The "Show Me your Papers" aspect, which would allow someone to be stopped, have their papers check and detained if they do not have the right papers, has been struck down.
NBC News is reporting the only aspect of the law upheld is that the provision that an immigration check must be made before someone that has been arrested (on other matters) can be released. The "Show Me your Papers" aspect, which would allow someone to be stopped, have their papers check and detained if they do not have the right papers, has been struck down.
NBC News is reporting the only aspect of the law upheld is that the provision that an immigration check must be made before someone that has been arrested (on other matters) can be released. The "Show Me your Papers" aspect, which would allow someone to be stopped, have their papers check and detained if they do not have the right papers, has been struck down.
Section 2: Requires an officer to make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there's reasonable suspicion that person is in the country illegally. This portion also requires law enforcement to check the immigration status of people arrested and hold them indefinitely until the status is determined.
Source
NBC News is reporting the only aspect of the law upheld is that the provision that an immigration check must be made before someone that has been arrested (on other matters) can be released. The "Show Me your Papers" aspect, which would allow someone to be stopped, have their papers check and detained if they do not have the right papers, has been struck down.
No word yet on what it is, but that ruling is in...links to follow when it hits the web.
1 of 4 previsions upheld...still no links. The one that is left is allowing police to arrest possible illegal immigrants if they are stopped for another crime. That must be reheard by the 9th.
NBC News is reporting the only aspect of the law upheld is that the provision that an immigration check must be made before someone that has been arrested (on other matters) can be released. The "Show Me your Papers" aspect, which would allow someone to be stopped, have their papers check and detained if they do not have the right papers, has been struck down.
Not true. Section 2, which was partially upheld, allows Arizona officials to ask for papers from those arrested, proving that they are in the US legally. If those arrested cannot produce proof, then all Arizona can do is report them to ICE. They are not allowed to do anything other than that.
Which means it's useless.
AZ Republican Senators and governor knew this would happen, they want to keep their cheap foreign labor profits flowing into their pockets.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?