Federal judge blocks Pa. town's crackdown on illegal immigrants

[Sierra]

Most of what was commented on was from an Associated Press article in the Washington Post. I had absolutely nothing to do with publication of the article; the views are not mine. I agree with you that people should learn English, that he should pay taxes (if he is not) on wages earned, and that that illegal immigrants, by virtue of being illegal, are breaking the law. I did, however, draw emphasis on certain parts of the article to support my side of the issue.

Please note that you flat out stated that the illegal who said he was not going to register as a tenant was not paying taxes. With what evidence are you making this claim? In order to obtain employment in the United States, the employee must provide information to complete an I-9. Part of that is a Social Security card. The employer has the obligation to verify the information provided and withhold and submit applicable taxes. Even if the information is fraudulent, there should still be withholdings. This is money the illegal cannot get back by filing income tax or for Social Security. He cannot lessen his tax burden with deductions for transportation, for charitable contributions, or even any medical expenses. Is he paying his fair share? Who knows? But to simply say he is not paying taxes should not be correct unless he is paid under the table.

By referring to the present you gave me, I was actually referring to the "Suspected Liberal" icon you created for me. I believe that was evident by its inclusion in the paragraphs referring to liberal and conservative. It was not a comment on the poptart. The poptart was your way of expressing dissatisfaction with my response and was accepted as such; I had no issue with it. Nor did I, at any point in time, make mention of the comment that accompanied the poptart. You are entitled to your opinion. As is was not inflammatory or abusive, there was no point in referring to it outside of a possible, PM, which I had no intention of generating.

But because you did broach it in a public forum, I will respond. As noted in the second article, it is not just the illegal immigrants that are being affected. Legal citizens were leaving the area to avoid the hassle that the new ordinances would have subjected them to. This was claimed by a storekeeper in a presumably Hispanic area (in keeping with the article's mention of the Hispanic business district), not by me and not by the reporter. As the original article specifically mentions the Hispanic Business Association and the second article specifically mentions "Hispanics_illegal or otherwise", I do not find it much of a stretch to conclude that we are talking about Hispanic immigrants, not European or Asian.

Am I trying to instigate something along the lines of "You're just picking on me because I'm (X race)"? No. Does race play an important part in this discussion? Yes. Did I phrase myself as well and as impartially as I could? Well, no, not really. I was very tired when I made the original post and wanted to comment on the article.

Regarding the Liberals screwing up the country, that can be argued just as strongly from the other side. Opinions on this topic will be as varied as the people who hold them. It serves no real purpose to argue it here.

[acreature]

Does race play an important part in this discussion? Yes.

Race has nothing to do with it.

There are two races, White and Black..... Technically, One Race... Human.

Hispanic is an Ethnicity.

[Reapp]

I am no attorney but I don't believe whether illegal aliens commit state crimes or no't is relevant.

What I believe is relevant is:

1. Does a city have the constitutional right to delve into federal law in this manner?
2. Do these ordinances indirectly affect the constitutional rights of Hispanics/brown people/legal immigrants?

Only if the answer to #1 is yes and #2 is no do I see these ordinances passing constitutional muster.

Are you forgetting that the states/cities can enact laws that are more restrictive than federal law but not less restrictive?

[Sierra]

Are you forgetting that the states/cities can enact laws that are more restrictive than federal law but not less restrictive?

I have not forgotten that. However, in current practice I believe it is focused more on criminal and civil laws.

Immigration law is a whole 'nother enchillada. ;) The ONLY entity with the power to regulate immigration is the federal government as per my understanding. You do not immigrate to a state, you immigrate to a country.

[future5.0]

What makes me crazy is you don't see any other "race" complaining. This law does NOT target any certain race.

[Qcanfixit]

I think this quote is applicable to the situation:

Rich people have always stayed on top by dividing white people from colored people/ but white people got more in common with colored people then they do with rich people/ we just gotta eliminate them. White people, black people, brown people, yellow people, get rid of 'em all/ All we need is a voluntary, free spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction/ Everybody just gotta keep f**kin' everybody til they're all the same color

---Sen. Jay Billington Bulworth (Warren Beatty)

[acreature]

I think this quote is applicable to the situation:

Rich people have always stayed on top by dividing white people from colored people/ but white people got more in common with colored people then they do with rich people/ we just gotta eliminate them. White people, black people, brown people, yellow people, get rid of 'em all/ All we need is a voluntary, free spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction/ Everybody just gotta keep f**kin' everybody til they're all the same color

---Sen. Jay Billington Bulworth (Warren Beatty)

We're talking about immigration.

[Ginig]

Are you forgetting that the states/cities can enact laws that are more restrictive than federal law but not less restrictive?

I'm perfectly aware of that. However, state and local laws have to conform to both federal law and the federal constitution.

I'm not saying this ordinance is violative of either the Fair Housing Act or the Constitution, but these are the issues that the federal courts have to decide upon.

[Creeker]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra
There is nothing inherently wrong about being a liberal.

...
Sure there is. The liberals are screwing up this great country.

Thank You for pointing out that comment... I missed it among the high pitched "YadaYada" whine.

[Creeker]

... As noted in the second article, it is not just the illegal immigrants that are being affected. Legal citizens were leaving the area to avoid the hassle that the new ordinances would have subjected them to. This was claimed by a storekeeper in a presumably Hispanic area (in keeping with the article's mention of the Hispanic business district), not by me and not by the reporter. As the original article specifically mentions the Hispanic Business Association and the second article specifically mentions "Hispanics_illegal or otherwise", I do not find it much of a stretch to conclude that we are talking about Hispanic immigrants, not European or Asian.
....

Interesting that the "legals" would flee to avoid providing documentation of their legality, just as I am sure the legal immigrants from Ireland, Nairobi, and Asia will be doing with justified contentment. I rather contend that they are moving out rather than be forced to change with the market demands of the area, and if their major clientel were illegal Hispanics, I would opine that their services were purchased, as were supplies purchased from a local "head" shop... the head shop keeps junkies in gear to allow them to participate in their illegal habit as well.

If the legal shop owners who cater to illegals suddenly find their sales dropping off, it is time to sell different products. If they can't adapt, seeya...

...
Regarding the Liberals screwing up the country, that can be argued just as strongly from the other side. Opinions on this topic will be as varied as the people who hold them. It serves no real purpose to argue it here.

You can't pooh pooh that comment away after dumping unjustified crap on Conservatives and then slinking away in the dark by claiming there's "no real purpose to argue it here".

I hardly think the conservative appointments to the Supreme and Federal courts are legislating from the bench and setting violent sexual offenders free to prey upon the innocent because our jails are too full. Nor does it take a Rocket scientist to realise that, because of the political correctness that the left has enacted, common sense is no longer a sense with which a person can function on a daily basis. Everything that was right is now wrong. It is undesirable to kill murderers, but shows that a woman can make decisions for herself and be a modern woman if she kills her unborn child who has committed no wrong... and lets not launch into the Euthenasia topic.

OOOh, yeah, those wicked conservatives have certainly screwed up the country, what, with wanting people held accountable for their actions and insisting that laws be enforced, particularly laws of which the lack of enforcement have a monstrous affect on the people who belong here as well as those who respect our country enough to legally immigrate and learn and use our language... :rolleyes:

[Sierra]

You can't pooh pooh that comment away after dumping unjustified crap on Conservatives and then slinking away in the dark by claiming there's "no real purpose to argue it here".

This thread is regarding an immigration ordinance enacted by Hazelton. Arguments about whether the Liberals or Conservatives have screwed up the country are more appropriate for the Political folder in my opinion, so I will try to keep my responses along those lines. This was not "slinking away in the dark", it was an attempt to stay on topic.

Part of what you apparently missed in the "high pitched YadaYada" was that I agreed with many conservative viewpoints and programs. I have never been in favour of releasing felons early due to overcrowding, I strongly support the death penalty, and I support increased penalties for violent offenses. To simply paint me simply as a liberal is incorrect.

I believe I have responded sufficiently to defend my position on this matter. I am not here to force you to change your mind and that has never been my intent. Law enforcement is an inherently conservative field. However, not everyone in the field is conservative, nor will every justice be a rightwing liberal.

The postings and the threads that follow are meant for discussions. What would be the point in everyone gathering around and saying "Rah Rah"?