Comments on: U.S. Supreme court draws line in immigration enforcement http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/ Your Inside Track to Arizona Politics Fri, 24 May 2013 00:49:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Kathryn Kobor http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-74595 Kathryn Kobor Sat, 18 Aug 2012 01:03:55 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-74595 How many more American citizens of all ethnicities must die because of illegal immigration??? It's about the numbers--it's about the numbers. Mexico needs to help and employ it's own citizens. We in the USA are not responsible for Mexico's citizens. We have citizens in this country who go to bed hungry every night. We must limit legal immigration into this country. Now is the time to save our country. Now is the time to stop illegal immigration and limit legal immigration. How many more American citizens of all ethnicities must die because of illegal
immigration???
It’s about the numbers–it’s about the numbers.
Mexico needs to help and employ it’s own citizens.
We in the USA are not responsible for Mexico’s citizens.
We have citizens in this country who go to bed hungry every night.
We must limit legal immigration into this country.
Now is the time to save our country. Now is the time to stop
illegal immigration and limit legal immigration.

]]> By: landaddy001 http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73624 landaddy001 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:34:29 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73624 Todd, I do consider the current federal immigration laws fair and workable (as long as they are adequately enforced). As a country, in each state and territory we institute laws to govern ourselves through our elected representatives. These laws are violated by citizens, permanent residents and illegal aliens every day. Many people go unpunished for their legal violations. That doesn’t mean the laws are unworkable, outdated or unfair. I have no problem with reasonable immigration laws; I just don’t agree that “comprehensive immigration reform” as currently defined is reasonable or fair to the American people. Comprehensive immigration reform seems set up to largely benefit the very (business and illegal aliens) people violating the current immigration laws. Todd, I do consider the current federal immigration laws fair and workable (as long as they are adequately enforced). As a country, in each state and territory we institute laws to govern ourselves through our elected representatives. These laws are violated by citizens, permanent residents and illegal aliens every day. Many people go unpunished for their legal violations. That doesn’t mean the laws are unworkable, outdated or unfair. I have no problem with reasonable immigration laws; I just don’t agree that “comprehensive immigration reform” as currently defined is reasonable or fair to the American people. Comprehensive immigration reform seems set up to largely benefit the very (business and illegal aliens) people violating the current immigration laws.

]]> By: landaddy001 http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73621 landaddy001 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:15:53 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73621 Todd I have read your posting and I still disagree with your point of view. The majority of the current immigration laws were written back in 1986 during President Reagan’s administration. I believe that President Clinton made some changes in 1996 too. My point is this country had an illegal alien problem back in the mid to late eighties (about 3 million illegal aliens) and the current immigration laws were considered a comprehensive fix at that time. No one said that the new immigration laws were unconstitutional, unreasonable, or too expensive at the time that they were written. Not everyone agreed but these laws were considered workable. Amnesty was given to the law breakers with the promise to the American people that a similar forgiveness for this type of law breaking would not be given again. So history doesn’t demonstrate that enforcement only will not work. During President Eisenhower’s administration enforcement only worked. If history demonstrates anything, it’s that the current immigration laws were NEVER ADIQUATELY enforced! Presently a lot of businesses ignored the immigration laws, the federal government did little to enforce the laws and the illegal aliens came into this country in larger numbers than before. Now you and a whole lot of other people want new immigration laws. How does any reasonable person trust the federal government to adequately enforce any new immigration laws when they won’t adequately enforce the ones already on the books? Also how about the message all of this law breaking sends to the rest of the country? If you want a humanitarian comprise how about this; all the immigration law breakers can apply to stay as permanent residents after paying a fine for ALL the legal violations committed (i.e.: document fraud, identity theft, forgery, illegal entry, working without permission, etc.). After their legal history has been documented and all fines paid, they can apply for permanent residents’ status but no US citizenship ever for anyone who violated the immigration laws. That way the people get their pound of flesh, the law breakers get to stay (if they qualify) and the government gets a chance to restore the people’s confidence by doing their jobs, at least adequately. Todd I have read your posting and I still disagree with your point of view. The majority of the current immigration laws were written back in 1986 during President Reagan’s administration. I believe that President Clinton made some changes in 1996 too. My point is this country had an illegal alien problem back in the mid to late eighties (about 3 million illegal aliens) and the current immigration laws were considered a comprehensive fix at that time. No one said that the new immigration laws were unconstitutional, unreasonable, or too expensive at the time that they were written. Not everyone agreed but these laws were considered workable. Amnesty was given to the law breakers with the promise to the American people that a similar forgiveness for this type of law breaking would not be given again. So history doesn’t demonstrate that enforcement only will not work. During President Eisenhower’s administration enforcement only worked. If history demonstrates anything, it’s that the current immigration laws were NEVER ADIQUATELY enforced! Presently a lot of businesses ignored the immigration laws, the federal government did little to enforce the laws and the illegal aliens came into this country in larger numbers than before. Now you and a whole lot of other people want new immigration laws. How does any reasonable person trust the federal government to adequately enforce any new immigration laws when they won’t adequately enforce the ones already on the books? Also how about the message all of this law breaking sends to the rest of the country? If you want a humanitarian comprise how about this; all the immigration law breakers can apply to stay as permanent residents after paying a fine for ALL the legal violations committed (i.e.: document fraud, identity theft, forgery, illegal entry, working without permission, etc.). After their legal history has been documented and all fines paid, they can apply for permanent residents’ status but no US citizenship ever for anyone who violated the immigration laws. That way the people get their pound of flesh, the law breakers get to stay (if they qualify) and the government gets a chance to restore the people’s confidence by doing their jobs, at least adequately.

]]> By: Todd Landfried http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73610 Todd Landfried Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:00:07 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73610 In response to landaddy001; your primary assumption is that the existing laws are good laws, meaning they are enforceable, just, Constitutional, solve the problem and are easy to follow. The reality is federal and state immigration laws are simply not good law. They're either outdated, poorly crafted, unconstitutional, or some combination thereof. Besides, the cost of enforcing bad laws will always be more expensive than fixing them. SB1070 is bad law because it is unconstitutional (SCOTUS said so), is unenforceable (SCOTUS said so), poorly crafted and every bit of available research shows it does more harm than good economically, socially and legally. See our presentations on SlideShare for more info: http://www.slideshare.net/azeir_org/ That being true, spreading it around the entire country is not going to make it any more successful or any more Constitutional. It doesn't work. It's not a viable option anymore. So what's your Plan B? "Plan B" must include other reforms to make it easier for employers to find workers, allow workers to enter legally and with full documentation ALONG WITH enforcement measures. Once you address the labor demand in a reasonable manner, nearly every other problem people complain about goes away because they have legal status. No one is suggesting that enforcement shouldn't be part of the solution. We are suggesting that history proves conclusively that enforcement ALONE does nothing to solve the problem. It much be more comprehensive. In response to landaddy001; your primary assumption is that the existing laws are good laws, meaning they are enforceable, just, Constitutional, solve the problem and are easy to follow. The reality is federal and state immigration laws are simply not good law. They’re either outdated, poorly crafted, unconstitutional, or some combination thereof. Besides, the cost of enforcing bad laws will always be more expensive than fixing them.

SB1070 is bad law because it is unconstitutional (SCOTUS said so), is unenforceable (SCOTUS said so), poorly crafted and every bit of available research shows it does more harm than good economically, socially and legally. See our presentations on SlideShare for more info: http://www.slideshare.net/azeir_org/

That being true, spreading it around the entire country is not going to make it any more successful or any more Constitutional. It doesn’t work. It’s not a viable option anymore. So what’s your Plan B?

“Plan B” must include other reforms to make it easier for employers to find workers, allow workers to enter legally and with full documentation ALONG WITH enforcement measures. Once you address the labor demand in a reasonable manner, nearly every other problem people complain about goes away because they have legal status.

No one is suggesting that enforcement shouldn’t be part of the solution. We are suggesting that history proves conclusively that enforcement ALONE does nothing to solve the problem. It much be more comprehensive.

]]> By: Nelson http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73585 Nelson Wed, 18 Jul 2012 02:11:37 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73585 I'm still waiting for Bush's guest worker program. Where is it? I’m still waiting for Bush’s guest worker program. Where is it?

]]> By: landaddy001 http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73568 landaddy001 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:20:25 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73568 @JCforpennies; first just because we live in “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” doesn’t mean that we live in a land without LAWS. And what’s with the Nazi Germany reference? Is it the most extreme example you could come up with to try to make a point? Germany is not the only country to have laws. In this country there are no laws that punish people based on their skin color or their religion. Second, while I understand that businesses break the laws every day that is supposed to be the exception not the rule. Since you think the economy is the most important thing why don’t you push to bring back child labor? I’m sure you could make a profit off of their little backs. Money is important but I was raised to believe that ethics are more important. From reading your posting I can see that you were raised with a different set of values. @JCforpennies; first just because we live in “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” doesn’t mean that we live in a land without LAWS. And what’s with the Nazi Germany reference? Is it the most extreme example you could come up with to try to make a point? Germany is not the only country to have laws. In this country there are no laws that punish people based on their skin color or their religion. Second, while I understand that businesses break the laws every day that is supposed to be the exception not the rule. Since you think the economy is the most important thing why don’t you push to bring back child labor? I’m sure you could make a profit off of their little backs. Money is important but I was raised to believe that ethics are more important. From reading your posting I can see that you were raised with a different set of values.

]]> By: JCforpennies http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73563 JCforpennies Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:19:39 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73563 Response to landaddy, and the only one that's really needed. Because we live in "the land of the free and the home of the brave," not a neo-replica of Nazi Germany. Dig it! Besides, don't you know that immigration is way off these days? Check it out. "It's the economy, stupid!" Prospective job seekers know when they should just move on to the next location, wherever that may be. Okay, that's two. Response to landaddy, and the only one that’s really needed. Because we live in “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” not a neo-replica of Nazi Germany. Dig it! Besides, don’t you know that immigration is way off these days? Check it out. “It’s the economy, stupid!” Prospective job seekers know when they should just move on to the next location, wherever that may be. Okay, that’s two.

]]> By: landaddy001 http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/07/16/u-s-supreme-court-draws-line-in-immigration-enforcement/comment-page-1/#comment-73546 landaddy001 Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:34:56 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=48231#comment-73546 The enforcement first approach method of dealing with illegal aliens has NOT been adequately applied to correct this country's illegal alien problem. The assumption by the author of this posting is false and very misleading. If enforcement is being adequately applied why are there 12 million plus illegal aliens in this country? Why are illegal aliens crossing our borders in the hundreds of thousands every year? Why do some states, counties and cities adopt sanctuary policies if enforcement first methods are being applied adequately? Lastly if enforcements first methods are being adequately applied, why doesn’t the federal government sue those state and local governments for interfering with federal immigration laws as they did to Arizona? There are too many reasonable things not being done to enforce immigration laws. How about we start adequately enforcing the immigration laws? The enforcement first approach method of dealing with illegal aliens has NOT been adequately applied to correct this country’s illegal alien problem. The assumption by the author of this posting is false and very misleading. If enforcement is being adequately applied why are there 12 million plus illegal aliens in this country? Why are illegal aliens crossing our borders in the hundreds of thousands every year? Why do some states, counties and cities adopt sanctuary policies if enforcement first methods are being applied adequately? Lastly if enforcements first methods are being adequately applied, why doesn’t the federal government sue those state and local governments for interfering with federal immigration laws as they did to Arizona? There are too many reasonable things not being done to enforce immigration laws. How about we start adequately enforcing the immigration laws?

]]>