Enforce The Law Act - Another Attack on Obama

And the Right's war on marajuana states begin.

 

It's more like Obama not wanting to follow the law. A prime example of Obama and Liberal US Supreme Court judges.

Immigrant Workers
Published May 26, 2011
Associated Press
Facebook0 Twitter0 Gplus0
Jan Brewer at Homeland Security Meeting AP

Arizona Gov. Jan BrewerAP

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona's law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Thursday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

The decision upholding the validity of the 2007 law comes as the state is appealing a ruling that blocked key components of a second, more controversial Arizona immigration enforcement law. Thursday's decision applies only to business licenses and does not signal how the high court might rule if the other law comes before it.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a majority made up of Republican-appointed justices, said the Arizona's employer sanctions law "falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states."

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, all Democratic appointees, dissented. The fourth Democratic appointee, Justice Elena Kagan, did not participate in the case because she worked on it while serving as President Barack Obama's solicitor general
Breyer said the Arizona law upsets a balance in federal law between dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers and ensuring that people are not discriminated against because they may speak with an accent or look like they might be immigrants.

Employers "will hesitate to hire those they fear will turn out to lack the right to work in the United States," he said.

Business interests and civil liberties groups challenged the law, backed by the Obama administration. The measure was signed into law in 2007 by Democrat Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona and now the administration's Homeland Security secretary.

 

Illegal Immigration is a Crime

Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States who:

Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or
Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;

has committed a federal crime.

Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/isacrime.html


Professors Say Obama Violating Constitution by Not Deporting ...
www.newsmax.com/US/...illegals-Obama/2012/10/13/id/459851 Cached
President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he gave a directive to law enforcement agencies to stand down on deporting illegal immigrants ...

 

Precisely; as I've mentioned in other posts in this forum, the nitpicking and tarnishing of the sitting President instead of focusing on the real issues (unemployment, labor, foreign policy, the environment, gun control, etc) is another reason why the American people are fed up with the republican party as a whole. And they wonder why they lost in 2012.

 

The one thing I'm confused about is how the hell is Congress going to enforce the law, when law enforcement is, by Constitutional mandate, the province of the Executive Branch?

Plus, how do they expect to get this law to pass when the Senate will not accede to this law? Even if they get enough Senators to pass the bill, how would they override a veto?

So it just proves that the United States Congress is just wasting taxpayer dollars by spending time on frivolous legislation with a miniscule chance of being passed, and exactly zero chance of surviving a challenge in the Supreme Court.

 

The US Congress has been wasting the taxpayer dollar since 2008 when it was decided to work to make Obama a one-term President and did everything in their power to make him look as bad as possible. They failed and he was re-elected to a second term of office and you'd think that they'd focus on getting a viable candidate to run for office in 2016, which of course they have failed to do to date. I'm waiting for them to lose the congress to the democrats in 2014 which will make it easier for the Obama administration to finally get their agenda pushed through after years of incessant delay's.

 

Of course. Any anti-whatever they can use to motivate the sheep in the base (fear, bigotry, hatred..) they will. So very typical.

- - - Updated - - -

The Republicans (sadly) have lied to themselves for so long, they actually BELIEVE in the wrong they are doing/propagating. Extremist, separatist nonsense.

 

I won't deny, that there IS an element of hypocrisy within politics. We ALL generally support the person we think is the best choice... even though every indicator we see about them may NOT seemingly point to perfection.

Politics and law... gosh, talk about two things where grey-areas exist. There seems to be no end and probably no comparison... except 'religion'.

So, if you think someone who has selected the agenda of the DNC (or RNC) is going to dump political support over what appears to be an effort to literally FRAME someone they support... then you can forget that foolishness.

If the President is some 'criminal'... then convict him already. I for one, am tired of the nonsense.

As I see it, Republicans are simply playing politics; specifically, seeking to DISTRACT from the terribleness of their agenda, policies and methods of governing.

To my fellow Americans, I say... don't be distracted by the political drama.

 

Yep. The millenials (particularly) dislike the nonsense going on. And the GOP will pay a price for it.

 

Yep, because it is our life this is affecting. Even the most conservative millenials I know could give a rip about social conservative issues. They just want the country to focus on the economy.

 

Well, it's clear you are making up your own narrative here, but what about the words that were actually spoken? Do you agree with what was said, or not? Try to quiet the voices in your head and listen to the man speaking. If you don't agree with the words, then state why. Don't just "read between the lines" (i.e. make things up), actually read the lines themselves. Because that is what any law will consist of, the actual words, not your private interpretation of the "hate" that supposedly inspired the law. And remember that any law will apply to ALL presidents, Democrat or Republican.

 

I'm not a fan of republican either. But the grand standing righteousness of the progressive party is over the top.
Like example Chris Matthews
If you don't like Obama care you are racist.
While the unions are bashing this crap all day till Obama have them their reward for the donations.
Where was the progressive pointing to the unions and calling them racist? By the way every video of union leaders complaining about paying their fair share were white males. Where were the race baiting? Where?

 

Do they hate the nonsense more than they hate being fleeced under BoBoCare?

 

Saying things while maybe true or false, cannot move what you say down field when what you say is used against another. In other words, if you tell me it is wrong to break into a candy store while giving us all the name of the person you think is breaking into the candy store without further evidence, tarnishes your own message of why one shouldn't break into a candy store. This is what Gowdy is doing. The real message was held hostage with hate, so it was forgotten, only to be replaced for one's hate of another. Your question becomes irrelevant once that occurs.

 

Wow you can come up with anything to avoid the truth. First you gave an Obama eating an orange but later found out it was an Apple crap. Now it's a candy store robbery story. Anything to avoid the proof right in front of you.

 

Probably. Yet each faction constantly endeavors to improve their 'image' (that is common political theatre). Still, their broader agenda is what most people are supporting, when they do.

I'm fairly certain that Mr. Obama (even with his flaws) is not the worst or most dangerous man to become President. So, people who keep painting THAT type of portrait of Mr. Obama, only get enough of my attention to mark them as an opponent.

Like Glenn Beck, suggesting directly that Mr. Obama is a racist; simply because his agenda doesn't line up with the one on the Right.

Not exactly sure what you're getting at, there.

There are some people in progressive politics who are likely racist. But it isn't difficult to see that Republican POLICIES and things like voter suppression laws... pretty much serve as stark indicators that the Right is relatively hostile to minorities. And there are also those Republican politicians (fairly numerous these days) who only get a slap on the wrist for their clearly racist commentary. This is all very noticeable and it adds up. It isn't as though the GOP wasn't warned about the same, even from inside of their own camp. And as an African American, I cannot help but be as concerned about that kind of thing, as many White Americans are about their gun rights (probably more concerned). Screwing with voter access and essentially 'winking' about it, saying it's "necessary" to prevent a crime that has such LOW statistics that it barely registers as being a problem (if at all)?

Maybe millions of Americans are not 'racist', but why take a chance in voting for people who support and enact policies which bring that moral issue directly into question? Why should Black Americans (or other minorities) see Republicans as favorable candidates? (BTW, minorities won't be minorities for long.)

Unions are essential to the well-being of middle class Americans; Republican politicians don't say that. If they have, I haven't heard them do so lately.

 

Americans are finally realizing (and accepting) that they were being SUPER "fleeced"... under the original medical system.

Single-payer or a Public Option was shot down... and it should not have been.

The President did the right thing, in not allowing things to stay as they were.

If nothing else, I'm well-pleased (and so are many other Americans) that he shook things up by staying-the-course.

 

No Obama isn't a racist. Maybe a sexist though. I don't see the same efforts to help young black male as their is for black females.

 

Because making it all worse is so much better. LOL

 

I don't care if you think unions are the bees knees. They should be treated the same as all others. If the laws says they should do their share than so be it.
Your opinion on unions can be argued but another day perhaps. Their unwillingness to do their fair share like the laws says and Obama willingness to repay their donations with exemptions if proof of Obama's fake war against citizen united. Big money bought and paid for Obama's favors.

 

Working Americans are being super fleeced now while lazy (*)(*)(*)(*)s that did not even want insurance are getting it off our labor. I am one of millions that were much better off before.

 

This nation's problems with proper assimilation and ethnic relations have improved... but it is reasonable to note that we have a couple generations to go, before things are the way many "wish" they were today.

As an older American, I have to say that THIS America is much better than 40 years ago. So, a lifetime may seem like too much for us personally... but to think/imagine that we cannot improve things (or should not try) would be a big mistake.

- - - Updated - - -

You perspective is something I generally disagree with.

So be it.

 

Yep, you must think that throwing people off the insurance they were happy with, putting them on plans that do not have the doctor they like, making health care more expensive, closing hospitals because of the new regulation due to Obamacare, costing States already stretched thin more money, and putting the country even further into debt is a good thing.

 

When you or anyone mentions unions, my primary concern is that they should be preserved.

Other than that, politics surrounding them will and should be ongoing.

Various things will go to court and be compromised over time. I don't have any perfected answers for you here.

 

Which is an unconstitutional violation of human liberty.

Cite the clause of the Constitution that grants King Obama the authority to tell someone their doctor isn't good enough for them.