PDA

View Full Version : Clinton: Obama Administration To Sue Arizona Over Immigration Law



smokin3000gt
06-17-2010, 06:11 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/17/clinton_obama_administration_to_sue_arizona_over_i mmigration_law.html




http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=XdaGQu2GSU
QUESTION: Thank you very much. I would like to start with the immigration debate in the United States. The recently approved law in Arizona has presented sort of a difficult scenario for the President Obama Administration. According to some polling, half of the United States has approved this law and maybe other states would like to implement it. How’s Obama Administration dealing with this debate? Is the immigration law near reality?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andrea, first, let me say how pleased I am that I have this chance to talk to you about these and other important issues. President Obama has spoken out against the law because he thinks that the federal government should be determining immigration policy. And the Justice Department, under his direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act. But the more important commitment that President Obama has made is to try to introduce and pass comprehensive immigration reform. That is what we need. Everyone knows it, and the President is committed to doing it.

So if everyone knows we need to do something, why do they get all bent out of shape when somebody does it?

7SteelGal43
06-17-2010, 08:55 PM
http://www.icanhasmotivation.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/bitchplease1.jpg

7SteelGal43
06-17-2010, 08:57 PM
So if everyone knows we need to do something, why do they get all bent out of shape when somebody does it?

Because what Hillary means by Obama's commitment to immigration reform is AMNESTY. Arizona ain't talkin' no amnesty.

suitanim
06-18-2010, 08:12 AM
Is this guy trying to not get re-elected? I mean, that's really the only explanation for his irrational behavior. Something like 85% of Americans SUPPORT what Arizona is doing...

BnG_Hevn
06-18-2010, 11:26 AM
Obama probably knows he is not getting re-elected so he is looking to do as much damage as he can before he gets kicked out.

Has the incumbent ever not been the candidate for re-election? Meaning, can the democratic party tell Obama to take a hike and let Hillary run?

suitanim
06-18-2010, 11:43 AM
I can think of one example, and that was Johnson, off the top of my head.

venom
06-18-2010, 11:53 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_PQxtQaf07Oo/S6aGE7Y5VQI/AAAAAAAABJM/wsQ4hXrr2iw/s400/obama+destroying+america.jpg

Dino 6 Rings
06-18-2010, 12:36 PM
New news out of Nebraska, trying the same thing in a town, but making it mandatory that all people renting, get an authorization card that validates their citizenship. Interesting attempt to drive illegals out.

X-Terminator
06-18-2010, 12:55 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_PQxtQaf07Oo/S6aGE7Y5VQI/AAAAAAAABJM/wsQ4hXrr2iw/s400/obama+destroying+america.jpg

Whoever created this picture obviously failed English class. Amerca??? Kinda takes away from the point if you can't spell.

SCSTILLER
06-18-2010, 02:02 PM
Obama probably knows he is not getting re-elected so he is looking to do as much damage as he can before he gets kicked out.
Has the incumbent ever not been the candidate for re-election? Meaning, can the democratic party tell Obama to take a hike and let Hillary run?

Well, he did state that he would rather be a great one term president (in his own mind I guess) than an average two term president.

SCSTILLER
06-18-2010, 02:03 PM
Whoever created this picture obviously failed English class. Amerca??? Kinda takes away from the point if you can't spell.

Must have been the "Deraming Morans"

7SteelGal43
06-18-2010, 02:50 PM
I'm confused though. What exactly are they going to sue Arizona over ? Is Arizona not merely enforcing federal laws regarding ILLEGAL immigrants ? Are they suing regarding racial profiling ? Shouldn't we wait 'til there IS some blatant racial profiling before filing a civil case ? Is the Obama administration suing over that fact that it's the FEDERAL not STATE govt that has the right enforce these ILLEGAL immigration laws ? Is it cause Arizona has "deputized" local and state law enforcement with the 'right' to arrest these illegals ?

Well all I can say is, if the FEDS won't do it, the STATES should !!!!

NJarhead
06-18-2010, 03:26 PM
Who was that who swore LA could handle the black out should Arizona cut their power?

:coffee:


Jubilant celebration turns rowdy in areas of LA
By DAISY NGUYEN (AP) – 6 hours ago
LOS ANGELES — A jubilant celebration over the Los Angeles Lakers' dramatic win in the NBA championship turned rowdy in scattered sections of the city, with raucous revelers hurling rocks and bottles at officers, setting fires and jumping on vehicles.
Hundreds of police officers massed around the Staples Center before Game 7 of the NBA finals Thursday night, aiming to prevent a repeat of the violence that accompanied the Lakers' victory last year. But despite their massive presence, scattered pockets of violence erupted in neighborhoods near the arena. No major incidents were reported in the rest of the city, police said.
By Friday, police spokesman Cleon Joseph said 38 people had been arrested. Most of the arrests were for public intoxication, while others were for vandalism and inciting a riot.
Television news footage showed several people jumping on a taxi as it attempted to leave the area near the arena after the Lakers beat the Boston Celtics 83-79. Someone opened a rear door of the vehicle, while others rocked it back and forth. The taxi eventually made its way through the crowd and out of the area.
Television footage also showed a man being beaten and a car set on fire. And there were scattered reports of windows being broken at several businesses.
Some men ran shirtless in the street, while other people revved car engines and honked their horns in celebration. Broken glass and burnt debris lined the roads.
Jazmine Rodriguez, 24, lives in an apartment building not far from Staples Center. She said every car on her street had its windows smashed.
"When we came down here, only one window was smashed. The cops told us to go back inside, and they (revelers) smashed the other one," Rodriguez said.
Delmi Ramos tried to salvage what she could from her car, which was filled with shards of broken glass.
"We just wanted to see the celebration and be part of the Lakers' win. We never thought this would happen," she said. "It's these young people who don't know how to behave. They cause damage to people, to the community, because they don't know how to celebrate in a healthy way."
Los Angeles city firefighters responded to 37 incidents within a half-mile radius of Staples Center in a three-hour period following the game, spokesman Brian Humphrey said. There were 15 rubbish fires, one vegetation fire, three vehicle fires and 18 medical aid requests for people ill or injured, Humphrey said. Eight people were transported by ambulance to hospitals. Humphrey didn't know the nature or extent of the injuries but said some were "quite serious."
One police officer suffered a broken nose after someone threw an object at him, Police Chief Charlie Beck said.
Shortly after the game, police declared an unlawful assembly, urging people to immediately disperse.
Revelers honked horns and yelled while emergency vehicles and police cars with their sirens blaring moved through the area. Some people set off fireworks.
Hundreds of Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies were deployed to East Los Angeles, where crowds were growing, but no major problems were reported, sheriff's Capt. Mike Parker said.
Associated Press writers Raquel Maria Dillon, Bob Jablon, Denise Petski and Nardine Saad contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.



http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ0K1WeV9uP5TxyJeyUzi7jRvS4gD9GDN8Q80

Dino 6 Rings
06-18-2010, 05:00 PM
I read on one of the blogs about this issue that the AG of Arizona is actually going to have to defend this law now, even though he's running as a Dem against the Gov that passed it.

Hilarious.

Anyway, this is nothing more than a dog and pony show. There is nothing unconstitutional in the Immigration law. However, the anchor baby law that they are trying to pass will lose at the federal level. Pretty sure anyway.

NJarhead
06-18-2010, 05:22 PM
I read on one of the blogs about this issue that the AG of Arizona is actually going to have to defend this law now, even though he's running as a Dem against the Gov that passed it.

Hilarious.

Anyway, this is nothing more than a dog and pony show. There is nothing unconstitutional in the Immigration law. However, the anchor baby law that they are trying to pass will lose at the federal level. Pretty sure anyway.

It most certainly will, but you have to love that the issue is being raised at all; it shows how fed up we are with all the illegal immigration and the bullshit that comes with it. I liken it to the Libs going after everything with a firing pin, but settling on certain guns.

MasterOfPuppets
06-18-2010, 05:35 PM
Arizona's Next Immigration Target: Children of Illegals

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1996064,00.html

Anchor babies isn't a very endearing term, but in Arizona those are the words being used to tag children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. While not new, the term is increasingly part of the local vernacular because the primary authors of the nation's toughest and most controversial immigration law are targeting these tots — the legal weights that anchor many undocumented aliens in the U.S. — for their next move.

Buoyed by recent public opinion polls suggesting they're on the right track with illegal immigration, Arizona Republicans will likely introduce legislation this fall that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona — and thus American citizens according to the U.S. Constitution — to parents who are not legal U.S. citizens. The law largely is the brainchild of state senator Russell Pearce, a Republican whose suburban district, Mesa, is considered the conservative bastion of the Phoenix political scene. He is a leading architect of the Arizona law that sparked outrage throughout the country: Senate Bill 1070, which allows law-enforcement officers to ask about someone's immigration status during a traffic stop, detainment or arrest if reasonable suspicion exists — things like poor English skills, acting nervous or avoiding eye contact during a traffic stop.
But the likely new bill is for the kids. While SB1070 essentially requires of-age migrants to have the proper citizenship paperwork, the potential "anchor baby" bill blocks the next generation from ever being able to obtain it. The idea is to make the citizenship process so difficult that illegal immigrants pull up the anchor and leave.
The question is whether that would violate the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment states that "All persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." It was intended to provide citizenship for freed slaves and served as a final answer to the Dred Scott case, cementing the federal government's control over citizenshi
But that was 1868. Today, Pearce says, the 14th Amendment has been "hijacked" by illegal immigrants. "They use it as a wedge," he says. "This is an orchestrated effort by them to come here and have children to gain access to the great welfare state we've created." Pearce says he is aware of the constitutional issues involved with the bill and vows to introduce it nevertheless. "We will write it right." He and other Republicans in the red state Arizona point to popular sympathy: 58% of Americans polled by Rasmussen think illegal immigrants whose children are born in the U.S. should not receive citizenship; support for that stance is 76% among Republicans.

Those who oppose the bill say it would lead to more discrimination and divide the community. Among them is Phoenix resident Susan Vie, who is leading a citizen group that's behind an opposing ballot initiative. She moved to the U.S. 30 years ago from Argentina, became a naturalized citizen and now works as a client-relations representative for a vaccine company. "I see a lot of hate and racism behind it," Vie says. "Consequently, I believe it will create — and it's creating it now — a separation in our society." She adds, "When people look at me, they will think, 'Is she legal or illegal?' I can already feel it right now." Vie's citizen initiative would prohibit SB1070 from taking effect and place a three-year moratorium on all related laws — including the anchor-baby bill — to buy more time for federal immigration reform. Her group is racing to collect 153,365 signatures by July 1 to qualify for the Nov. 2 general election.

Both sides expect the anchor-baby bill to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court before it is enacted. "I think it would be struck down as facially unconstitutional. I can't imagine a federal judge saying this would be O.K.," says Dan Barr, a longtime Phoenix lawyer and constitutional litigator. Potentially joining the anchor-baby bill at the Supreme Court may be SB1070, which Republican Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed into law in April. It is set to take effect July 29, but at least five courtroom challenges have been filed against it. Pearce says he will win them all.

stlrtruck
06-18-2010, 08:32 PM
So a state attempting to enforce the laws already on the FEDERAL BOOKS is raising questions and creating lawsuits from the same federal government that created the original laws?

Man I can't wait for these idiots to be ousted.

MasterOfPuppets
06-18-2010, 08:41 PM
So a state attempting to enforce the laws already on the FEDERAL BOOKS is raising questions and creating lawsuits from the same federal government that created the original laws?

Man I can't wait for these idiots to be ousted.

their argument is , that immigration falls under federal jurisdiction not states... but yet the states have to carry the financial burdens of the feds not doing their jobs, but yet don't want the states picking up their slack, and demanding they do their job.

venom
06-18-2010, 08:49 PM
The Federal Government to sue a State......only a Dem would do something STUPID like that .