Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: Feds suspend immigration enforcement program

  1. #21
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,480
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500452]Rainblow, do you[U] really[/U] think Judge Roberts is liberal?
    In this particular case sure he might be liberal regarding most parts of the AZ law.
    Except the crucial part that B. Hussein and Withholder were against!

    Don't cry you got the cr's of the world who won't enforce the law and the dogsh!ts who will get 'em off the hook if they ever do.

    The spigot on the pipeline of fresh street meat (the only one libs approve of) won't be shut off just yet either.[/QUOTE]


    Oh well. To whoever made Flushing take his meds during the lucid interval where he made the only non-insane post I can remember from him, thanks. Can you do it again?

  2. #22
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=doggin94it;4500493]Oh well. To whoever made Flushing take his meds during the lucid interval where he made the only non-insane post I can remember from him, thanks. Can you do it again?[/QUOTE]

    Are you posting from the bottom of a barrel with a handcrank powered laptop yet, freak? Let's hope it's very soon if not imminently.

  3. #23
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    Three of Four Struck down.

    The fourth made almost impossible to perform, due to termination of Federal Policy, and threats from Holder that the Fed. will be watching over AZ to ensure no racial profiling (as they see it), no cops pulled from other vital duty (as they see it), no descrimination against illegal immigrant crime victims coming forward or even feeling like they can't from forward (as they see it) and that no civil rights violations occur (as they see it).

    Hard to see this as anything other than a total, 100%, victory of the Democrats on the issue of immigration law and enforcement.

    Unless, of course, you think this issue guarantees a victory in November and your simply projecting this issue as a major factor to that presumed victory.

    On the issue itself tho, 100% win by the left.

  4. #24
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4500524]Three of Four Struck down.

    The fourth made almost impossible to perform, due to termination of Federal Policy, and threats from Holder that the Fed. will be watching over AZ to ensure no racial profiling (as they see it), no cops pulled from other vital duty (as they see it), no descrimination against illegal immigrant crime victims coming forward or even feeling like they can't from forward (as they see it) and that no civil rights violations occur (as they see it).

    Hard to see this as anything other than a total, 100%, victory of the Democrats on the issue of immigration law and enforcement.

    Unless, of course, you think this issue guarantees a victory in November and your simply projecting this issue as a major factor to that presumed victory.

    On the issue itself tho, 100% win by the left.[/QUOTE]

    Do a little more analysis before whining. The AZ law pre-empted some of what the feds can/should do-states canít enforce parts of federal laws the federal government doesnít want them to enforce. That is understandable that those sections were struck down. The part about jobs-where it is a [U]criminal [/U]offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job is too strict and doesn't hold the employer accountable.

    The part B. Hussein didn't like (where he likened your neighborhood DQ to a potential holding pen), the reasonable suspicion part allows state authorities to aid the Federal government. It supports the law rather than preempting it. Not conservatives/the GOP/rational people's fault that (D) and 0 won't enforce the law. Scalia knows how dumb it is to have a law on the books that can't or won't be enforced.

    [SIZE=3]8 United States Code section 1304(e) or 1306(a) [/SIZE]
    Last edited by Jungle Shift Jet; 06-25-2012 at 06:52 PM.

  5. #25
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,459
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500452]Rainblow, do you[U] really[/U] think Judge Roberts is liberal?
    In this particular case sure he might be liberal regarding most parts of the AZ law.
    Except the crucial part that B. Hussein and Withholder were against!

    Don't cry you got the cr's of the world who won't enforce the law and the dogsh!ts who will get 'em off the hook if they ever do.

    The spigot on the pipeline of fresh street meat (the only one libs approve of) won't be shut off just yet either.[/QUOTE]

    Such a crybaby.


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

  6. #26
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    Who deports illegals again? Who will house or pay for housing the illegals while waiting to be deported? HSI doesn't have a office in every little town.

    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500564]Do a little more analysis before whining. The AZ law pre-empted some of what the feds can/should do-states canít enforce parts of federal laws the federal government doesnít want them to enforce. That is understandable that those sections were struck down. The part about jobs-where it is a [U]criminal [/U]offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job is too strict and doesn't hold the employer accountable.

    The part B. Hussein didn't like (where he likened your neighborhood DQ to a potential holding pen), the reasonable suspicion part allows state authorities to aid the Federal government. It supports the law rather than preempting it. Not conservatives/the GOP/rational people's fault that (D) and 0 won't enforce the law. Scalia knows how dumb it is to have a law on the books that can't or won't be enforced.

    [SIZE=3]8 United States Code section 1304(e) or 1306(a) [/SIZE][/QUOTE]

  7. #27
    All League
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Boston area
    Posts
    4,471
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=doggin94it;4500211]That . . . may be the single stupidest political move that an American administration has ever made.[/QUOTE]

    My thoughts exactly. The election is months away and he shoots himself in the foot. Obama can go nuts if he wins another 4 years but these clueless decisions are a gift for the Romney campaign.

  8. #28
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4500608]Who deports illegals again? Who will house or pay for housing the illegals while waiting to be deported? HSI doesn't have a office in every little town.[/QUOTE]

    What is this, a f'ing quiz? :steamin:

    ICE does the actual deportation under DHS guidelines of which it is a part, what of it. B. Hussein and Withholder maintained that AZ couldn't even ask these pukes for documentation about their immigration status so they couldn't get booted out. HSI doesn't need an office in every little town if DHS made it hard to get into the US in the first place as it should be and enforced the freakin' laws on the books.

    Why should I give a sh!t about the cost of temporary housing when it's a drop in the bucket compared to the parasitic leeching of social services at all government levels in exchange for (D) votes. Take a piece of the multi-$B given away in unmerited tax refunds by the IRS every year to these thieves if you are looking for funding for ideally should be a very short stay in a Ramadan Inn. Why must there be a wait to determine something that can be easily determined in minutes in the computer age? To pad government payrolls OT and pensions?

    Just like the answer to "How do you eat an elephant"? is one bite at a time, they can all be kicked out one leech at a time.

  9. #29
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,538
    Post Thanks / Like
    on that basis the ruling was right. however the bigger picture is if the feds will now enforce the constitutional laws on the books and whether or not law enforcement (or lack thereof) is an impeachable offense. imo not upholding the law can be construed as impeachable. let's see if congress has enough will to do this. still pretty tricky because there are still many fools in this country who are wild for the prez and don't have a clue about the constitution.

    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500564]Do a little more analysis before whining. The AZ law pre-empted some of what the feds can/should do-states canít enforce parts of federal laws the federal government doesnít want them to enforce. That is understandable that those sections were struck down. The part about jobs-where it is a [U]criminal [/U]offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job is too strict and doesn't hold the employer accountable.

    The part B. Hussein didn't like (where he likened your neighborhood DQ to a potential holding pen), the reasonable suspicion part allows state authorities to aid the Federal government. It supports the law rather than preempting it. Not conservatives/the GOP/rational people's fault that (D) and 0 won't enforce the law. Scalia knows how dumb it is to have a law on the books that can't or won't be enforced.

    [SIZE=3]8 United States Code section 1304(e) or 1306(a) [/SIZE][/QUOTE]

  10. #30
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    Nice rant.

    How do these illegals get deported? Who is responsible for illegals? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT who has been deporting illegals all along.

    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500634]What is this, a f'ing quiz? :steamin:

    ICE does the actual deportation under DHS guidelines of which it is a part, what of it. B. Hussein and Withholder maintained that AZ couldn't even ask these pukes for documentation about their immigration status so they couldn't get booted out. HSI doesn't need an office in every little town if DHS made it hard to get into the US in the first place as it should be and enforced the freakin' laws on the books.

    Why should I give a sh!t about the cost of temporary housing when it's a drop in the bucket compared to the parasitic leeching of social services at all government levels in exchange for (D) votes. Take a piece of the multi-$B given away in unmerited tax refunds by the IRS every year to these thieves if you are looking for funding for ideally should be a very short stay in a Ramadan Inn. Why must there be a wait to determine something that can be easily determined in minutes in the computer age? To pad government payrolls OT and pensions?

    Just like the answer to "How do you eat an elephant"? is one bite at a time, they can all be kicked out one leech at a time.[/QUOTE]

  11. #31
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    Um no.


    [QUOTE=sameoldjets;4500703]on that basis the ruling was right. however the bigger picture is if the feds will now enforce the constitutional laws on the books and whether or not law enforcement (or lack thereof) is an impeachable offense. imo not upholding the law can be construed as impeachable. let's see if congress has enough will to do this. still pretty tricky because there are still many fools in this country who are wild for the prez and don't have a clue about the constitution.[/QUOTE]

  12. #32
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,738
    Post Thanks / Like
    I wonder, in theory, how this rulimg, that Immigration Law and Immigration Enforcement is a Federal, not a State issue.....I wonder how this will/could effect so-called "Sanctuary Cities" where they refuse to be a party to enforcement of Immigration Law.

    As this case appears to make clear that States/Locals have no authority to overrule or even assist without specific permission immigration law or enforcement, under an Administration that chooses to enforce the Law, would then a Sanctuary City be forced to abandon their sanctuary policy as an unconstitutional breach of this very Federal power?

    It would seem that it cannot work both ways. If a State has no authority to suppliment or enforce any portion of immigration Law without Federal permission, would then a State alos not have the authority to ignore Federal Law should teh Fed. so desire?

  13. #33
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4500717]Nice rant.

    How do these illegals get deported? Who is responsible for illegals? THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT who has been deporting illegals all along.[/QUOTE]

    Um, The topic of the thread is that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT just told a state they will decline many of the calls reporting undocumented Democrats that the Homeland Security Department may get from their police. Explain to us the wisdom behind this decision.

  14. #34
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500735]Um, The topic of the thread is that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT just told a state they will decline many of the calls reporting undocumented Democrats that the Homeland Security Department may get from their police. Explain to us the wisdom behind this decision.[/QUOTE]

    From the Fox News article:

    [QUOTE]The move means that even if local police step up immigration checks,[/QUOTE]

    Read more: [url]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/25/feds-suspend-immigration-enforcement-program-after-arizona-court-ruling/#ixzz1yrjIvC00[/url]

    It's illegal for state and or local law enforcement to do exactly what is stated.

  15. #35
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,194
    Post Thanks / Like
    In less than 4 years, Obama is giving Dubya a run for WOAT. Well done Barry. :rolleyes:

  16. #36
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4500806]From the Fox News article:



    Read more: [URL]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/25/feds-suspend-immigration-enforcement-program-after-arizona-court-ruling/#ixzz1yrjIvC00[/URL]

    It's illegal for state and or local law enforcement to do exactly what is stated.[/QUOTE]

    No, the issue is that B. Hussein and his corrupt crew of skumbags has decided to selectively enforce the law. Either you're OK with that or you don't understand what is being done.

    From the same story.
    [B]
    [U]The Obama administration quickly moved to deflate the remaining provision.[/U]
    By Monday afternoon, the Department of Homeland Security had pulled back on a program known as 287(g), which allows the feds to deputize local officials to make immigration-based arrests. According to a Homeland Security official, the administration has determined those agreements are "not useful" now in states that have Arizona-style laws. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has since rescinded that agreement in Arizona -- with the state itself, and with three local law enforcement agencies.

    The move means that even if local police step up immigration checks, they'll have to rely on federal officials to make the arrests.
    And federal officials made clear that ICE would be selective in responding to the expected rise in calls from Arizona and other police agencies about immigration status. Officials said ICE will not respond to the scene unless the person in question meets certain criteria -- such as being wanted for a felony.


    [/B]

  17. #37
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    Arizona wanted their own laws and they got bounced, the AZ governor wants her way. ICE will continue to do their federal duty.


    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4500982]No, the issue is that B. Hussein and his corrupt crew of skumbags has decided to selectively enforce the law. Either you're OK with that or you don't understand what is being done.

    From the same story.
    [B]
    [U]The Obama administration quickly moved to deflate the remaining provision.[/U]
    By Monday afternoon, the Department of Homeland Security had pulled back on a program known as 287(g), which allows the feds to deputize local officials to make immigration-based arrests. According to a Homeland Security official, the administration has determined those agreements are "not useful" now in states that have Arizona-style laws. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has since rescinded that agreement in Arizona -- with the state itself, and with three local law enforcement agencies.

    The move means that even if local police step up immigration checks, they'll have to rely on federal officials to make the arrests.
    And federal officials made clear that ICE would be selective in responding to the expected rise in calls from Arizona and other police agencies about immigration status. Officials said ICE will not respond to the scene unless the person in question meets certain criteria -- such as being wanted for a felony.


    [/B][/QUOTE]

  18. #38
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,417
    Post Thanks / Like
    [IMG]http://www.google.com/url?source=imglanding&ct=img&q=http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-G0sCVKE8lyU/Tl2qvLMB8yI/AAAAAAAAAuY/jyZif3riPYs/s1600/Obama+-+Mexican+Sombrero.jpeg&sa=X&ei=DszpT928EaXe0QG9uM2nDQ&ved=0CAkQ8wc&usg=AFQjCNEPj9gfixgMWzxSggbO7uwIltLdug[/IMG]

  19. #39
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,431
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4501028]Arizona wanted their own laws and they got bounced, the AZ governor wants her way. ICE will continue to do their federal duty.[/QUOTE]

    The part of the AZ law B. Hussein and Withholder wanted gone remained.
    Because as you say there wasn't an HSI office in every little town
    state level deputization was allowed.
    The federales withdrew that deputization 10 seconds after the SC decision-why?

    ICE does as they are told, so if they are told to ease back they are fulfilling their duty as they see it even if they sit on their thumbs and do nothing. They are in the middle.
    Most US citizens don't see it that way, as long as one leech is here from any nation the duty remains unfulfilled even if you think you're doing a heckuva job.

  20. #40
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,954
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Jungle Shift Jet;4501068][B]Withholder[/B][/QUOTE]

    Nice.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us