Appears "PUT NAME of Poster Here" Constitutional Experts Were Wrong

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I don't think they have to come out to the scene, they'll come to the detention center and given the number of illegals in AZ, there won't be just one for the feds to do whatever they may do (I don't know what they will do ... again, will probably vary greatly depending on the circumstances).

But here is the beauty of the ruling, in AZ being illegal is not a crime. Police may only detain a person if they believe they have or are about to commit a crime along the lines of reasonable suspicion.

Therefore, an AZ officer can ask all they want but they don't seem to have the authority to actually detain any longer.

[DEDixon 39]

It will also depend on the circumstances of the arrests. How does one tell the difference between and illegal and a US citizen?

I think there are plenty of questions a police officer can ask to anyone to determine legal resident vs. illegal. The justices know the police won't always get it right, but nevertheless, the law was upheld by majority liberal justices (wow!).

The police will be trained. They know their methods will be questioned so I think their questions will be fair. How else without questions? I know know. Definitely can't go by the way someone looks, they surely know that.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I think there are plenty of questions a police officer can ask to anyone to determine legal resident vs. illegal. The justices know the police won't always get it right, but nevertheless, the law was upheld by majority liberal justices (wow!).

The police will be trained. They know their methods will be questioned so I think their questions will be fair. How else without questions? I know know. Definitely can't go by the way someone looks, they surely know that.

I really dont see how they are planning - if at all going - to do it. A traffic cop will not be able to validate the status of US citizens, no matter how many questions they ask.

It is a pity that Arizona is spending so much money on this propaganda rather than reinforcing the actual border with more agents.

[DEDixon 39]

But here is the beauty of the ruling, in AZ being illegal is not a crime. Police may only detain a person if they believe they have or are about to commit a crime along the lines of reasonable suspicion.

Therefore, an AZ officer can ask all they want but they don't seem to have the authority to actually detain any longer.

So you are saying the supreme court upheld the law but gives officers no power to do anything. That makes no sense at all. I don't believe their hands will be as tied as you say.

[JohnR! 5,495]

So you are saying the supreme court upheld the law but gives officers no power to do anything. That makes no sense at all. I don't believe their hands will be as tied as you say.

That is precisely the case. Jen Brewer has hanged the cops to dry....

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

So you are saying the supreme court upheld the law but gives officers no power to do anything. That makes no sense at all. I don't believe their hands will be as tied as you say.

They have effectively safeguarded the general US population - my objection to the law was always its effects in relation to Arizona's stop and identify laws. The law still helps with regards to people committing actual crimes.

[DEDixon 39]

It is a pity that Arizona is spending so much money on this propaganda rather than reinforcing the actual border with more agents.

It isn't Arizona's call on how much is spent on the border or how many agents are there. The AZ law is a result of lack of enforcement by the feds.

[JohnR! 5,495]

It isn't Arizona's call on how much is spent on the border or how many agents are there. The AZ law is a result of lack of enforcement by the feds.

That doesnt make sense. If Jen Brewer can make laws in regards to immigration, she should also be able to send her agents to the border to patrol it, lest it be perceived as grandstanding.

[DEDixon 39]

That is precisely the case. Jen Brewer has hanged the cops to dry....

I don't know how this will play out in real life. Where I am most amazed it that 3 liberal justices upheld the most hotly debated part of the law. The portion that the "experts" said was a no brainer for strike down.... so much for the constitutional experts that were quoted so much on here 2 years ago. Of course, they were left leaning experts so biased from the beginning.

What happens now, exactly, I do not know.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I don't know how this will play out in real life. Where I am most amazed it that 3 liberal justices upheld the most hotly debated part of the law. The portion that the "experts" said was a no brainer for strike down.... so much for the constitutional experts that were quoted so much on here 2 years ago. Of course, they were left leaning experts so biased from the beginning.

What happens now, exactly, I do not know.

They gave the office of the Governor that which she asked. It will be interesting to watch what she will do with that part of the legislation. IMHO most believed the SCOTUS was going to struck down that part of the law, because without the rest, it lacks effectiveness. Who know now that have a sense of humor in the High Court.

[DEDixon 39]

That doesnt make sense. If Jen Brewer can make laws in regards to immigration, she should also be able to send her agents to the border to patrol it, lest it be perceived as grandstanding.

The agents on the border are federal agents, paid for by the federal gov't. The entire operation at the border is federal and everything decided there is federal. And what are you talked about, the supreme court just ruled that states can't make immigration laws hence the 3 portions which were struck down.

[JohnR! 5,495]

The agents on the border are federal agents, paid for by the federal gov't. The entire operation at the border is federal and everything decided there is federal. And what are you talked about, the supreme court just ruled that states can't make immigration laws hence the 3 portions which were struck down.

Precisely. Jen Brewer was simply grandstanding. She passed legislation which cannot be effected by those under her command. She is just a populist politician pandering to the ignorance of some of her constituency. Not better nor worse than any other politician.

[DEDixon 39]

They gave the office of the Governor that which she asked. It will be interesting to watch what she will do with that part of the legislation.

I agree and we actually do not know yet. The stop have only just begun.

The justices did caution that more lawsuit could follow because of their ruling, but nevertheless, the most hotly debated portion was upheld so definitely more to come. Let's just not listen to the experts in the next go-around. Keep an open mind.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I agree and we actually do not know yet. The stop have only just begun.

The justices did caution that more lawsuit could follow because of their ruling, but nevertheless, the most hotly debated portion was upheld so definitely more to come. Let's just not listen to the experts in the next go-around. Keep an open mind.

Fair dinkum!

What I cant understand, is why dont they plug the border first and then think about the next steps. IMHO it makes as much sense as fixing the water damage before the leak is contained and repaired.

[DEDixon 39]

Precisely. Jen Brewer was simply grandstanding. She passed legislation which cannot be effected by those under her command. She is just a populist politician pandering to the ignorance of some of her constituency. Not better nor worse than any other politician.

Not precisely - I just read in an article that the stops will begin. They are going to do nothing. Again, I don't know how it will play out, but it isn't as you have written above, I don't think they'll be that passive in AZ.

And come on, what pol isn't a populist? Obama wasn't being a populist when he change the policy for deporting illegals under 30? If you can't see through his move this close to an election as populist then you are certainly in denial and by no means anything close to a moderate.