SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law

Posted by: hm1996

SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 02:30 PM

Well, it looks like Zero, AKA
Quote:
President Obama (fine man!)
may get his ears pinned back as well as an education on our Constitution come mid-summer based on comments made during the SCOTUS hearings held on both the Health Care bill and the Az immigration law.

Hopefully SCOTUS will also explain to Chuckie that if the feds want to claim the exclusive resposibility for securing our borders, then they must step up to the plate and actually do so!




Quote:

Supreme Court signals support for Arizona immigration law provision

April 25, 2012
FoxNews.com

The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday that it might uphold a key element of Arizona's immigration law, as justices across the board suggested the state has a serious problem on its hands and should have some level of sovereignty to address illegal immigration.

The justices appeared to ready to allow a provision requiring police officers to check the immigration status of people they think are in the U.S. illegally.

The justices strongly suggested Wednesday they are not buying the Obama administration's argument that the state exceeded its authority, with Chief Justice John Roberts at one point saying he doesn't think the federal government even wants to know how many illegal immigrants are in the country.

"You can see it's not selling very well," Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Obama administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

Just like the health care overhaul challenge heard earlier this month, Wednesday's hearing on the immigration law drew passionate surrogates from both sides. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was loudly booed by the law's opponents in front of the courthouse. She said in a statement Wednesday afternoon that "I am filled with optimism -- the kind that comes with knowing that Arizona's cause is just and its course is true."

While the justices addressed the traffic stop provision Wednesday, it was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped draft the law, voiced optimism in Arizona's chances.

"This was a very good day for Arizona in the Supreme Court today," he told Fox News. "The U.S. Justice Department was on the ropes."

But Brent Wilkes, director for the League of United Latin American Citizens, warned that the law would take a "human toll" on Arizona families if allowed to stand.

"This is really a racial profiling bill," he told Fox News.

The hearing Wednesday morning has implications far beyond Arizona's borders, as several states, including Alabama and South Carolina, have followed in Arizona's footsteps to craft their own immigration enforcement measures.

The Obama administration, which opposes those measures, has argued that the country cannot sustain a patchwork of separate immigration laws.

Verrilli, who is arguing on behalf of the government, said in his brief that the Executive Branch has the power to enforce immigration policy.

"For each state, and each locality, to set its own immigration policy in that fashion would wholly subvert Congress' goal: a single, national approach," he wrote.

But Arizona argued that the current system is broken, and that the state is paying an unfair price for that failure.

"Arizona shoulders a disproportionate burden of the national problem of illegal immigration," attorney Paul Clement argued in his brief. He argued that enforcement attention in California and Texas has turned the Arizona border into a funnel for illegal immigrants, with a third of illegal border crossings occurring there.

The attorney described Arizona's law as a response to an "emergency situation" -- with illegal immigrants soaking up millions of state dollars in health care and education, posing safety risks to ranchers and cutting into the state's job market.

Two of the key statutes, which have been blocked and will be at issue in Wednesday's arguments, are provisions to bar illegal immigrants from seeking a job and to require law enforcement to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally in the course of a routine stop.

A ruling from the Supreme Court is likely to come this summer, in the thick of the presidential election year -- it could either bolster what has been a bold move from the Obama administration's Justice Department to intervene in state issues ranging from immigration to voter ID laws, or stop the administration in its tracks and open the floodgates to even more state laws that challenge federal authority.

The immigration case arrives at the high court Wednesday just weeks after the justices heard arguments in the multi-state challenge to the federal health care overhaul.

Democrats on Capitol Hill this week were already scrambling to prepare for the possibility that the high court upholds the immigration law. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced a plan to introduce a bill that would effectively nullify Arizona's law -- though it would stand virtually no chance of passing in the Republican-controlled House.


"Immigration has not and never has been an area where states are able to exercise independent authority," Schumer said Tuesday at a Capitol Hill hearing, where he announced he would introduce the proposal should the Supreme Court "ignore" the "plain and unambiguous statements of congressional intent"
and uphold the Arizona law.

But former Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of the law, said: "We have a national crisis, and yet everyone wants to ignore that: the cost, the damage, the crime."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/.../#ixzz1t4oYIbF2


Regards,
hm
Posted by: azmastablasta

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 03:59 PM

But Brent Wilkes, director for the League of United Latin American Citizens, warned that the law would take a "human toll" on Arizona families if allowed to stand.

What a crock, the real human toll is the legal citizens of Arizona and this country as a whole. Lost jobs, lowered wage levels, higher crime rates, higher welfare rates, unpaid medical bills which raise everyone's rates, higher auto and home insurance rates and on and on. We suffer this and more so the libs can feel warm and fuzzy, as well as swell their voting pool.

As Kagan has recused herself, which she should have also done on the zerocare case but didn't, that leaves 8 Judges to vote. Kennedy is the weak link here. If it ends up 4-4 it defaults back to the 9th circus decision which removes the teeth from the bill.

As the Chief Justice so aptly put it, it is evident to anyone with more than sh#@ for brains that the federal government simply doesn't want to know about illegal immigration.
Posted by: dogcatcher

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 04:24 PM

The US hasn't had a tough stance on illegal immigration in the last 20 years. Both sides of the aisle have catered to the vote that wants status quo.

Many US businesses depend on illegal immigrants to stay in business. The penalties for hiring an illegal is a joke, a slap on the wrist and "carry on". Along with the businesses, so goes the American public, they also hire them to work for them. The penalty, again a slap on the wrist and "carry on".

Too many Americans are part of the problem. Those that don't choose to be part of the solution are the problem.

The same goes for illegal drugs, Americans support the Mexican drug cartels with their "casual recreational" use of drugs. These are your friends, your neighbors, your relatives, and in some cases yourselves, that choose to ignore the laws and buy the illegal drugs and to hire illegal immigrants.

Are you part of the solution or part of the problem?
Posted by: Coyotejunki

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 05:55 PM

Quote:
may get his ears pinned back as well as an education on our Constitution


But how can that be? After all, Obama is a constitutional scholar, he even taught it at a university. smile
Posted by: jumprightinit

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 06:30 PM

Originally Posted By: Coyotejunki
Quote:
may get his ears pinned back as well as an education on our Constitution


But how can that be? After all, Obama is a constitutional scholar, he even taught it at a university. smile


But his classes were to anarchists and marxists on how to defeat the Constitution not on how to govern by it.
Posted by: nmcowpuncher

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 10:20 PM

You're right on the money dogcatcher, I see it everyday. I have ranches I work for in Arizona who are opposed to 1070 because it puts their illegal employees at risk. It is a tough deal for agriculture, it is almost impossible to find anyone who wants to work on a farm or ranch other than folks from south of our border, been there, done that. I don't agree with these people's stand, but I certainly understand it. We're either a nation of laws or we are not.
Posted by: Coyotejunki

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 10:35 PM

I am curious as to how much these ranches pay the illegals?

The thought of Obama being in office another 4 years and perhaps picking a Supreme court judge or two, just scares the crap out of me.
Posted by: sweatybetty

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/25/12 11:37 PM

its gonna take an awful lot of pins for little barrys ears
Posted by: Rocky1

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/26/12 01:36 AM

Originally Posted By: Coyotejunki
I am curious as to how much these ranches pay the illegals?

The thought of Obama being in office another 4 years and perhaps picking a Supreme court judge or two, just scares the crap out of me.



Typically field labor is paid by what they pick. They're given a basket to pick full, when it's full they take it to the truck/trailer/whatever. When they dump their basket, they're given a chip. I've seen these guys on produce farms in south Florida picking cucumbers, and there are those amongst them that will pick their basket full, toss it on their shoulder and literally RUN to the trailer with it. Then they run back to where the rest of the crew is picking, and do it all over again. As for what they make, I've been told that it's not unusual for even a slightly motivated picker to make upwards of $400 - $500 a week. Obviously a runner makes more. The slow ones don't of course, but those that move, will. Thing is, the husband, wife, and if the children aren't in school, the kids too, will all pick, and a family may take home $1500 - $1600 a week or more. BUT... all of them will WORK!!

As for the farmers hiring them, they frequently try to hire Americans; they won't work. Most won't even think about coming out to pick cucumbers all day, bent over in the Florida sun, getting paid by the basket. They don't want to work that hard, they want to get paid by the hour, so they can dick off all day, they feel the job is beneath them; and as long as they got welfare to buy beer and food stamps for groceries, why work. It is not a matter of the farmers trying to make an extra buck or two hiring cheap labor, they literally cannot get the Americans to work like the Mexicans will. Honestly, we need to keep the Mexicans, and send Calderone the welfare cases.

They are a very hard working, industrious people. I will not criticize them there in any respect. That however, does not change the fact that they are not above the law, and if they are going to be here, then they need to get their paperwork straight, or our government needs to throw all of the laws in this country away. It is discriminatory for our government to tell American citizens that they must obey the law, then turn around and allow 13 million illegal aliens to roam freely in this country. And, most certainly, to file suit against those states that are trying to save themselves from the financial burden created by these illegal immigrants.





Posted by: nmcowpuncher

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/26/12 11:15 PM

It's the same on farms over here in New Mexico, Rocky, it's basically piece work, a chip for a bucket of chiles, sack of onions, box of lettuce. Those who work the fastest make the most. Law requires that they make at least minimum wage and the farmer has to provide or pay the contracter to provide toilets and hand washing equipment and they have to carry a rider on their insurance while the workers are in the field. It is not a cheap deal, but they do work and work hard. I agree very much with the rest of your post. It is tough because I have worked with a lot of these folks over the years on ranches, they are as good and honest people as you would ever want to meet and would give you the shirt off their backs if you needed it, and that is all a lot of them have. They just need to get legal or we need to create a legal way for them to be here.
Posted by: hm1996

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 12:04 AM

Originally Posted By: nmcowpuncher
It is tough because I have worked with a lot of these folks over the years on ranches, they are as good and honest people as you would ever want to meet and would give you the shirt off their backs if you needed it, and that is all a lot of them have. They just need to get legal or we need to create a legal way for them to be here.


This is true; years ago we had the Bracero program which granted work permits to farm/ranch workers and that seemed to work well. Don't know why it was discontinued.

Regards,
hm
Posted by: Tnslim

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 02:01 AM

Being a flooring contractor I'm around new construction on a daily basis and get to observe different crafts at work. I know of a Mexican drywall crew, a bricking crew and two landscaping crews and they all do great work. They show up on time every day, do flawless work and clean up their mess before leaving which is something none of the local crews do. However, we need to get them legal so they can pay taxes to feed and house the American entitlement group.

On a side note; there is a Mexican flooring crew that while their work quality is less than my standards they can sure lay a lot of floor at a much cheaper price than I can. I've lost several commercial jobs to them where the contractors want the cheapest labor possible and where quality is not an issue. I get the high end custom work but they get the hotels and discount stores.
Posted by: Stu Farish

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 09:01 AM

Posted by: Stu Farish

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 09:03 AM

Posted by: Stu Farish

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 09:07 AM

Posted by: doggin coyotes

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 09:13 AM

Read a couple of things in this thread that stuck out..

Rocky: "cannot get the Americans to work like the Mexicans will. Honestly, we need to keep the Mexicans, and send Calderone the welfare cases."

Tnslim: "However, we need to get them legal so they can pay taxes to feed and house the American entitlement group."

sweatybetty: "its gonna take an awful lot of pins for little barrys ears"

thumbup1
Posted by: hm1996

Re: SCOTUS hearing on Arizona Immigration Law - 04/27/12 12:00 PM

Originally Posted By: doggin coyotes

Read a couple of things in this thread that stuck out..

sweatybetty: "its gonna take an awful lot of pins for little barrys ears"


lol lol lol

Regards,
hm