flipper wrote:
On 29 May 2010 15:40:15 GMT, John Doe wrote:
flipper flipper fish.net wrote:
John Doe jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote:
flipper flipper fish.net wrote:
Jim Thompson To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon
...
Waiting for Flippant to provide a link to the same argument
somewhere else in the world. Or maybe he thinks that he has a
unique argument that is somehow valid.
Already did, since you're google incompetent.
Besides, law enforcement prosecutes, it does not adjudicate.
There's nothing for your "law enforcement [to] prosecute" if you
can't adjudicate.
You have semantical problems, Flippant.
It only seems that way to the mentally incompetent.
Law enforcement prosecutes all day long without adjudicating
anything. That is why they are known as the "prosecution". The
judicial branch adjudicates, Flippant, that is why it has judges.
The police 'prosecute' that which they have reasonable cause to
believe has a chance of being favorably adjudicated. They do not
'prosecute' simply for the thrill of it or, if they do, they find
themselves the subject of disciplinary review.
And one rather serious criteria for a reasonable expectation of
favorable adjudication is the State having power to adjudicate in the
first place, which the State does not have in the case of immigration
law.
The police do not, for example and fortunately for you, 'prosecute'
for "being an Internet jackass" because the State has no power to
adjudicate such an alleged 'crime' and 'prosecuting' unconstitutional
statutes is a good way to get Federal troops visiting your locality.
Think you can now figure out the mysterious "semantical problems" of
"there's nothing for your "law enforcement [to] prosecute" if you
can't adjudicate"? The State has no power to adjudicate immigration
law so the police have nothing to 'prosecute'.
Have you actually read SB1070, as amended,
Go back and look at what happened to Prop 187. Prop 187
attempted to bar State services to 'illegals' but the court
ruled it unconstitutional and one reason is because the State
has no power to decide who's 'illegal' as that's a Federal
Power. I.E. The State has no legal basis upon which to deny
services because it has no power to 'determine immigration
status'
Which court ruled it unconstitutional? Provide a citation.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/03/19/prop.187/
"LOS ANGELES (AllPolitics, March 19) -- A U.S. District Court
judge has declared most of California's Proposition 187
unconstitutional.
In her final ruling, Pfaelzer rejected California's attempt to
regulate immigration, which she said is the federal government's
responsibility.
The American Civil Liberties Union's Southern California chapter
was one of the five groups which sued to stop Proposition 187.
In a statement, ACLU spokesman Mark Rosenbaum said Pfaelzer
correctly denied California's attempt to regulate immigration.
So, on Flippant's side
It's not 'my side'. I explicitly said I had come to the conclusion
"THE COURT" would likely 'rule' that way because I had investigated
the past rulings of the Court.
is one liberal federal judge and the
American Civil Liberties Union.
It's a hell of a lot more than your jackass fabrications.
Governor Pete Wilson was probably
removed from office before a chance to appeal.
Wrong. The case was, by agreement, mediated.
But then, your google ineptitude limits you to fabrications.
And of course an
open border advocate California governor would not push to appeal
the liberal District Court Judge opinion.
Determining the immigration status of a person and enforcing
immigration law
The State has no power to do so.
is not "regulating immigration". The act of
regulating occurs at the border, regulating immigration is
allowing or stopping immigrants at the border.
Take it up with Webster and the judge.
You'd lose but it would be fun listening to the judge call you a
jackass.
or are you just pontificating, or performing "practiced
ignorance"?
You can try 'shooting the messenger' all you like but it won't
change the Court and all I did was tell you why I had come to
the conclusion it, at the District level at least, would
likely strike down the Arizona statute: mainly because I
investigated the IIRIRA and what happened to Prop 187.
Your idea that illegal immigrant status cannot be determined by
law enforcement is just silly, Flippant,
I didn't say "law enforcement." I said State and local police
State and local police is "law enforcement", Flippant.
The FBI will be interested to hear they are not law enforcement, not
to mention customs, the IRS, TIGTA and, our current favorite, the INS.
not a party to the IIRIRA cooperative agreement, as required by
Federal law.
Apparently Flippant is confused about an individual officer making
the determination.
Not I, the Federal government as specifically spelled out in Federal
law: the IIRIRA.
But in fact, the Arizona law and other states
laws being proposed say "The person's immigration status shall be
verified with the federal government". That is, if the individual
officer is not empowered to make that determination by himself.
Unless a party to an IIRIRA cooperative agreement the individual
officer is not empowered to do anything regarding immigration status,
and that includes 'asking'.
How about we send a few of those illegals to set up camp on your door
step, take your job away, steal your personal items, take your car out
for a drug ride and return it back to your home so you can take the
rap for it?
Oh, did I forget something, feed them while they are there and make
sure you pay all if not more, your taxes, so these people can sit back
and laugh at you and others like you as they take your rights,
jobs and belongings away from you.
You may not agree with Arizona because of special interest on your
part or maybe you're being a classical idiot..
I hope one day you suffer the same fate as others have
dealing with this problem.. Obviously you are green and appear to be a
snot nose bigot..
Its a serious problem and people like yourself are the major reason
why we have this issue in the states..
If I didn't know any better, It seems like you are trying to protect
them ? It wouldn't surprise me at all if you were some how involve with
these illegals more so than you are telling us.
Personally i'm getting tired and I am sure others are of you spitting
legal documents over this system in the fashion you are. It only shows
your bottom feeding attempt to reach out in hopes that others will
see it your way, on grounds that I can only imagine..
You are a disgrace as an American. That is, if you really are one?
People like you are one of the major reasons why these illegals have
some much grazing space. (moron)..
You are not doing to well in the popularity race.