Since the case has begun the federal government is petitioning the courts to bar Arizona's new immigration law from going into effect next week.
A recent inquiry into the legal aspects of this newest of Arizona's immigration legislation has a federal judge questioning the governments arguments against the law.
Although the inquiry has just begun one federal judge has begun to examine the federal Justice Department's major arguments that the law has interfered with federal enforcement of the countries immigration laws.
US Judge Susan Bolton on Thursday has expressed her opinion that Arizona has the right to be inhospitable to people who have entered the United States illegally.
In addition, as a break thought for states rights she further took the side that perhaps federal law no longer should pre-empt the various state statutes.
The founding fathers of America made certain provisions in the constitution which were meant to prevent the federal government from becoming too overbearing and taking total control of the individual states and their rights.
A check of the American constitution will clearly reveal that the state trumps the federal government in issues such as this.
My own grandfather was an immigrant who arrived legally in New York during the turn of the last century.
When he arrived at Ellis Island he held a fear that he would make an error and be returned to Greece once again.
The ships manifest as well as the immigration documents indicated his country of origin and the amount of money he carried into the country.
It is not so different today as it was then.
These people are entering our country illegally unlike the immigrants of previous eras.
They are breaking not only the federal laws but the individual state laws as well, and they rightfully deserve to be captured and punished.
This is clearly criminal activity which is mistakenly masquerading as civil and human rights.
They leave their own country and come here to turn our nation into a third world nation similar to the place they left.
All the while these criminals are aided and abetted by various advocacy groups, taxpayer-funded lobbyists and the bleeding heart federal officials who have sworn to uphold our nation's laws prohibiting activities such as this.
Judge Bolton did however support the federal premise that by making it a state criminal offense for people to lack the proper immigration documentation the statute could conceivably violate the Supreme Court ruling which prohibits any state from establishing their own individual immigration systems.
Personally I do not view Arizona's law as circumventing the federal immigration laws.
There is no mention of a system of registration involved in this matter, so therefore that portion of the law is left strictly to the federal government.
When thinking along those lines as to what the current doctrine would indicate, is that the various States should not complement and assist the Federal government in the execution of any programs that have been established by the feds.
If this concept were to be followed to the "T" then state and local police should not * Arrest people for drug-related crimes * Not participate in collection of federal taxes or fees * Not extend any police protection to Federal politician at event held in the various states * Not conduct enforcement of environmental laws That is just a quick last minute thought.
Now I ask you is that the way we really wish to handle this issue? I seriously think not.
By Joseph Parish Copyright @2010 Joseph Parish www.
survival-training.
info
A recent inquiry into the legal aspects of this newest of Arizona's immigration legislation has a federal judge questioning the governments arguments against the law.
Although the inquiry has just begun one federal judge has begun to examine the federal Justice Department's major arguments that the law has interfered with federal enforcement of the countries immigration laws.
US Judge Susan Bolton on Thursday has expressed her opinion that Arizona has the right to be inhospitable to people who have entered the United States illegally.
In addition, as a break thought for states rights she further took the side that perhaps federal law no longer should pre-empt the various state statutes.
The founding fathers of America made certain provisions in the constitution which were meant to prevent the federal government from becoming too overbearing and taking total control of the individual states and their rights.
A check of the American constitution will clearly reveal that the state trumps the federal government in issues such as this.
My own grandfather was an immigrant who arrived legally in New York during the turn of the last century.
When he arrived at Ellis Island he held a fear that he would make an error and be returned to Greece once again.
The ships manifest as well as the immigration documents indicated his country of origin and the amount of money he carried into the country.
It is not so different today as it was then.
These people are entering our country illegally unlike the immigrants of previous eras.
They are breaking not only the federal laws but the individual state laws as well, and they rightfully deserve to be captured and punished.
This is clearly criminal activity which is mistakenly masquerading as civil and human rights.
They leave their own country and come here to turn our nation into a third world nation similar to the place they left.
All the while these criminals are aided and abetted by various advocacy groups, taxpayer-funded lobbyists and the bleeding heart federal officials who have sworn to uphold our nation's laws prohibiting activities such as this.
Judge Bolton did however support the federal premise that by making it a state criminal offense for people to lack the proper immigration documentation the statute could conceivably violate the Supreme Court ruling which prohibits any state from establishing their own individual immigration systems.
Personally I do not view Arizona's law as circumventing the federal immigration laws.
There is no mention of a system of registration involved in this matter, so therefore that portion of the law is left strictly to the federal government.
When thinking along those lines as to what the current doctrine would indicate, is that the various States should not complement and assist the Federal government in the execution of any programs that have been established by the feds.
If this concept were to be followed to the "T" then state and local police should not * Arrest people for drug-related crimes * Not participate in collection of federal taxes or fees * Not extend any police protection to Federal politician at event held in the various states * Not conduct enforcement of environmental laws That is just a quick last minute thought.
Now I ask you is that the way we really wish to handle this issue? I seriously think not.
By Joseph Parish Copyright @2010 Joseph Parish www.
survival-training.
info