Fuhrer Obama's Administration Officially Legally Challenging Arizona's SB1070

[DEDixon 39]

Prop 187 and SB1070 are not analygous in any way. There is yet no right to immigrate illegally, as there is a right to be educated on the taxpayers' dime.

Did you miss what I posted about 287g? The federal government trains municipal law enforcement agencies to detain those who are suspected to be here illegally. I know you prefer to ignore what doesn't fit your increasingly narrow paradigm, but ICE's 287g website states the benefits of having local officers involved with federal immigration enforcement:

Benefits

•By working together, local and federal officers can better identify and remove criminal aliens – which is a tremendous benefit to public safety.

•One of the biggest benefits to our 287(g) partners is that they are able to better identify who they have in custody.

And, AZ's law doesn't disagree with this provision either:

Racial profiling

•Racial profiling is simply not something that will be tolerated; and any indication of racial profiling will be treated with the utmost scrutiny and fully investigated. If any proof of racial profiling is uncovered, that specific officer or department could have their agreement rescinded.

•In addition to the training these officers receive from their local departments, the 287(g) training includes coursework on multicultural communication and the avoidance of racial profiling.

The Obama administration feels that AZ's law is unconstitutional, but I'm sure they are too incompetent to prove it. Even if they do, courts don't always have the final say . . . thank God.

respond Steven.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Prop 187 and SB1070 are not analygous in any way. There is yet no right to immigrate illegally, as there is a right to be educated on the taxpayers' dime.

Did you miss what I posted about 287g? The federal government trains municipal law enforcement agencies to detain those who are suspected to be here illegally. I know you prefer to ignore what doesn't fit your increasingly narrow paradigm, but ICE's 287g website states the benefits of having local officers involved with federal immigration enforcement:

ICE training local enforcement is not the same as SB1070. Those officers under 287g are thoroughly trained by ICE for one. Secondly, they are delegated directly through ICE. SB1070 gives the authority to all local law enforcement to detain anyone they suspect is here illegally without any oversight from ICE. But if you think that SB1070 will hold up constitutionally, then you should welcome any court challenge and the chance to prove me wrong. I'm going by the legal opinions of constitutional scholars who believe that SB1070 is dead in the water, constitutionally speaking.

Edited June 20, 2010 by El Buscador

[Sofiyya 1,687]

ICE training local enforcement is not the same as SB1070. Those officers under 287g are thoroughly trained by ICE for one. Secondly, they are delegated directly through ICE. SB1070 gives the authority to all local law enforcement to detain anyone they suspect is here illegally without any oversight from ICE. But if you think that SB1070 will hold up constitutionally, then you should welcome any court challenge and the chance to prove me wrong. I'm going by the legal opinions of constitutional scholars who believe that SB1070 is dead in the water, constitutionally speaking.

That's a pretty weak comeback, bro. 287g expresses the need for cooperation between local law enforcement and federal officers in the enforcement of immigration law. There is nothing in SB7010 that supercedes the authority of federal immigration laws. If anything, it signals a need for more 287g training in Arizona and more cooperation between local officers and federal officers. Yet, the neglect and hostility toward the needs of Arizona is just another thing that hurts the feds case. Auhorized representatives have openly stated that they may not assist Arizona to repatriate their criminal illegals.

Your "constitutional scholars" obviously don't take into consideration the way the administration is repeatedly shooting itself in the foot. Any complaint brought by the federal government against a state will necessarily include the impetus of the law and the role of the feds when considering its constitutionality. By bringing a complaint against Arizona, the feds open the door for countersuits and close examination of its actions, its constitutional responsibilities and its culpabilty. What do your scholars have to say about that?

Edited June 20, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Obama 2012 1,714]

ICE training local enforcement is not the same as SB1070. Those officers under 287g are thoroughly trained by ICE for one. Secondly, they are delegated directly through ICE. SB1070 gives the authority to all local law enforcement to detain anyone they suspect is here illegally without any oversight from ICE. But if you think that SB1070 will hold up constitutionally, then you should welcome any court challenge and the chance to prove me wrong. I'm going by the legal opinions of constitutional scholars who believe that SB1070 is dead in the water, constitutionally speaking.

Cops already have this authority...... The bill just makes sure they are actually doing it and holds them accountable to actually do so.

This might be news to you, but local authorities work with ICE all the time on various issues.

If you don't have a proper ID during a legal encounter, they will "detain" you to figure out who the hell you are. It happens all the time.

Find an illegal and have them get pulled over by a copy without an ID in this country and see what happens. Bet there's a call to ICE very quickly in most cases, except for your "sanctuary" liberal f-tard cities.

[DEDixon 39]

ICE training local enforcement is not the same as SB1070. Those officers under 287g are thoroughly trained by ICE for one. Secondly, they are delegated directly through ICE. SB1070 gives the authority to all local law enforcement to detain anyone they suspect is here illegally without any oversight from ICE. But if you think that SB1070 will hold up constitutionally, then you should welcome any court challenge and the chance to prove me wrong. I'm going by the legal opinions of constitutional scholars who believe that SB1070 is dead in the water, constitutionally speaking.

that makes it sound like local cops can enforce like drug laws only after thoroughly trained by the feds.

in every case, where federal and local laws are the same, local cops need to be trained by the feds?

can't trust local cops to police the same laws the feds do, is that it? somehow, the feds won't profile, but local police will? but, if local police are trained "thououghly" they have the same federal magic?

doesn't sound right.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Cops already have this authority...... The bill just makes sure they are actually doing it and holds them accountable to actually do so.

This might be news to you, but local authorities work with ICE all the time on various issues.

If you don't have a proper ID during a legal encounter, they will "detain" you to figure out who the hell you are. It happens all the time.

Find an illegal and have them get pulled over by a copy without an ID in this country and see what happens. Bet there's a call to ICE very quickly in most cases, except for your "sanctuary" liberal f-tard cities.

I notice you keep bringing this up...under an "encounter" they can't detain anyone for the purpose of checking immigration. You seem to be thinking of the old text.

that makes it sound like local cops can enforce like drug laws only after thoroughly trained by the feds.

in every case, where federal and local laws are the same, local cops need to be trained by the feds?

can't trust local cops to police the same laws the feds do, is that it? somehow, the feds won't profile, but local police will? but, if local police are trained "thououghly" they have the same federal magic?

doesn't sound right.

If you're not trained by ICE you may not be well versed in immigration law is what he is getting at.

Edited June 20, 2010 by Sousuke

[evli1966 88]

It is well within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Attorney General's office to challenge any state law that is believed to be unconstitutional. Those who support the SB1070 should have nothing to fear if they truly believe the law is constitutional. I think they are worried because they know when leading constitutional scholars have stated they believe SB1070 is unconstitutional, the law won't hold up to legal scrutiny when challenged in court. Good for the Obama Administration for standing up for our beloved Constitution. God Bless this country and the principles it stands for.

Actually it is their right to do so ...As it is the right of every American LEGAL CITIZEN to speak out and denounce the administration for not protecting our rights as LEGAL CITIZENS.

We can actually force the governments hand to amend the constitution as well.

We do not fear the law is not constutional it is about the back handed way they are doing it trying to denounce it in the media before it goes before the supreme court. Also the approach they are taking to securing the borders which falls under this as well shows the administration is far out of line from the LEGAL CITIZENS that voted them into office.

The LEGAL CITIZENS are angry at how Hillary are making comments as she did in another country

As for furer Obama I would agree with Madhouse to some degree but with all that is happning and Obama with a Pompous attitude towards every arguement that doesn't align with his view how can people see anyting other than that type of description.

This adminstration has to go and it will...the problem is will we get anything better.

[DEDixon 39]

If you're not trained by ICE you may not be well versed in immigration law is what he is getting at.

so if local cops aren't trained by the ATF, they can't enforce like firearms and tobacco laws.

so if local cops aren't trained by DEA, they can't enforce like drug laws.

see what i'm getting at? you either have a green card, driver's license, something... same stuff the feds would use to prove you are here legally or you don't have these items, what is so difficult about that, i wonder. no more complicated that drug laws, tobacco laws, firearm laws and local police do fine enforcing these laws where they match fed laws.

[evli1966 88]

ICE doesn't have the funding to man the task force needed to enforce the laws.

The reason they are supposed to be working with and trainng local law enforcers is to execute the laws.

But most cases I hear or read about have no follow up from ICE and even staements from ICE saying it will not enforce the laws in AZ specfically shows the director of ICE is in violation.

And if this is in repsonse to what his office has been instucted to do by the Obama adminstration and the Att General then they should be held accountabel as well.

Sh!te rolls down hill but the smell permeates everything above it.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I notice you keep bringing this up...under an "encounter" they can't detain anyone for the purpose of checking immigration. You seem to be thinking of the old text.

No, they changed the text because people are imbeciles and don't understand what the adjective before "encounter" means, so they had to change it to "Stop."

It still says the exact same thing, just simplified for the stupid.

[evli1966 88]

No, they changed the text because people are imbeciles and don't understand what the adjective before "encounter" means, so they had to change it to "Stop."

It still says the exact same thing, just simplified for the stupid.

I am for the Law either way.

But I wouldn't have recognized the adjective.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

There is clearly a One World, open borders agenda being pushed by the White House. Notice the contrast between what immigration enforcement used to be in Arizona before Obama, and what the Obama administration has has done to try to undermine enforcement since 2008, from the hostile persecution of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the cut back of 287g in his county, to the federal offensive against SB 1070:

July 21, 2008

ICE reports record number of deportations in Arizona

2008 removals increase by more than 5,500 over similar period in 2007

PHOENIX - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials are crediting innovative programs and improved organizational efficiency with spurring a sharp increase in the number of illegal aliens removed from Arizona this year.

For the first nine months of this fiscal year (October 2007 to June 2008) the Phoenix Office of Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) removed 38,799 illegal aliens from Arizona. Over the same period in the previous fiscal year, there were 33,243 removals, an increase of 5,556. DRO officials are projecting that the total number of illegal aliens removed by ICE from Arizona will top more than 50,000 for the first time since the agency was created in 2003.

"As ICE continues to strengthen its partnerships and focus its resources more effectively, we are seeing positive results in our mission to identify and remove illegal aliens from Arizona," said Katrina S. Kane, DRO Phoenix field office director. "Two programs in particular - Law Enforcement Agency Response (LEAR) and the Criminal Alien Program at the Maricopa County Jail - have played an important role in this increase.

The LEAR program began in September 2006 to provide a more comprehensive response to Arizona law enforcement agencies seeking assistance from ICE during encounters with suspected illegal aliens. From October 1, 2006 to June 30, 2007, the LEAR unit received 897 calls for assistance and arrested 5,249 illegal aliens. For the same period this fiscal year, the unit received 1,283 calls for assistance and arrested 6,235 illegal aliens.

Following a 287(g) agreement made last year with the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office to train and designate county jail detention officers with federal immigration authority, ICE and MCSO set up a joint Criminal Alien Program (CAP) at Maricopa County's inmate intake facility to screen the immigration status of everyone who is arrested in the county and processed at their facility.

ICE began CAP in June 2007 to identify criminal foreign-born aliens in federal, state and local jails and prisons and target them for removal. By combining the national CAP program with MCSO's local 287(g) program, both agencies are better able to effectively use their resources in ensuring that criminal aliens are not released back onto the street to further victimize Arizona communities. More than 14,295 foreign-born criminals have been identified and targeted for removal from the United States. A similar program run in conjunction with the Arizona Department of Corrections has resulted in more than 4,200 illegal aliens identified for removal from the state prison system.

"One of ICE's top enforcement priorities is to improve public safety in Arizona communities," said Kane. "By focusing our resources on programs that identify criminal aliens for removal from the United States, we are succeeding in our mission to keep foreign-born criminals off of the streets in Arizona."

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

No, they changed the text because people are imbeciles and don't understand what the adjective before "encounter" means, so they had to change it to "Stop."

It still says the exact same thing, just simplified for the stupid.

No they changed the text because encounter could mean anything including a person requiring emergency assistance.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

so if local cops aren't trained by the ATF, they can't enforce like firearms and tobacco laws.

so if local cops aren't trained by DEA, they can't enforce like drug laws.

see what i'm getting at? you either have a green card, driver's license, something... same stuff the feds would use to prove you are here legally or you don't have these items, what is so difficult about that, i wonder. no more complicated that drug laws, tobacco laws, firearm laws and local police do fine enforcing these laws where they match fed laws.

Well there are so many categories of visas out there and different forms of status that yes it is more complicated than tobacco laws. I wonder how they will be trained to handle a K1 holder for instance. Would they know that the NOA for AOS means they have status?

Edited June 20, 2010 by Sousuke

[evli1966 88]

Well there are so many categories of visas out there and different forms of status that yes it is more complicated than tobacco laws. I wonder how they will be trained to handle a K1 holder for instance. Would they know that the NOA for AOS means they have status?

Ok

Instead of considering more stimulus money or bogus programs that are not needed or the saving from what we are giving to Illegals; why dont we increase the man power for ICE and start making a new Law Enforcment group targeting this.

I am not sure but we could either create more offices in the states and man them or make the current ones bigger with more staff. (This is not were I would want to go because now government has gotten bigger)

I am thinking allowing the hiring of trained people to be stationed at either Sherrif Depts or State police. this would be less Man power tht needs to be hired and specifically trained.

I am sure there are better plans than not doing anything