quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

quote:

I don't think this will stand. To much precedence against it.
Of course if SF can ignore law why can't Az ignore executive orders.
This is the can of worms that the sanctuary cities have opened up

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I love the piecemeal approach of the states when it comes to exec. orders.

FEMA was never created by law but by exec, orders yet I bet these states still go along with the laws passed to fund and operate that agency.

I wonder if it's because [it] now employs 2,600 people and the states love the money ?

Plus, as far as I know SF didn't follow exec, orders concerning ICE and immigrant detention. [It] didn't 'break the law.'

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

Are the lawyers in Arizona brain dead? Have they not heard about the concept called 'The Supremacy Clause'? That the powers of the federal government hold sway over those of the individual states, whom hold sway over local townships?

All it takes is just one court case to destroy this legal bullshit. To which is asked: Why are they doing it?

Answer: For political points.

That's right, the very people that bitch against 'government misusing tax payer dollars' is misusing tax payer dollars. They did it with gay marriage, and now this. Basically, they are behaving like immature children, rather than responsible adults to which they were originally hired. Maybe they should be removed from office for defrauding the American people by the DOJ. That would be ironic....

Since it would be an executive order for the DOJ to do that....

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I love the piecemeal approach of the states when it comes to exec. orders.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
FEMA was never created by law but by exec, orders yet I bet these states still go along with the laws passed to fund and operate that agency.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I wonder if it's because [it] now employs 2,600 people and the states love the money ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Plus, as far as I know SF didn't follow exec, orders concerning ICE and immigrant detention. [It] didn't 'break the law.'

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

Are the lawyers in Arizona brain dead? Have they not heard about the concept called 'The Supremacy Clause'? That the powers of the federal government hold sway over those of the individual states, whom hold sway over local townships?

All it takes is just one court case to destroy this legal bullshit. To which is asked: Why are they doing it?

Answer: For political points.

That's right, the very people that bitch against 'government misusing tax payer dollars' is misusing tax payer dollars. They did it with gay marriage, and now this. Basically, they are behaving like immature children, rather than responsible adults to which they were originally hired. Maybe they should be removed from office for defrauding the American people by the DOJ. That would be ironic....

Since it would be an executive order for the DOJ to do that....

Two points.

A Maybe they are doing this because Obama has required them to spend money they don't have.
B If the supremacy clause prevents this it would also prevent sanctuary cities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

Are the lawyers in Arizona brain dead? Have they not heard about the concept called 'The Supremacy Clause'? That the powers of the federal government hold sway over those of the individual states, whom hold sway over local townships?

All it takes is just one court case to destroy this legal bullshit. To which is asked: Why are they doing it?

Answer: For political points.

That's right, the very people that bitch against 'government misusing tax payer dollars' is misusing tax payer dollars. They did it with gay marriage, and now this. Basically, they are behaving like immature children, rather than responsible adults to which they were originally hired. Maybe they should be removed from office for defrauding the American people by the DOJ. That would be ironic....

Since it would be an executive order for the DOJ to do that....

Two points.

A Maybe they are doing this because Obama has required them to spend money they don't have.
B If the supremacy clause prevents this it would also prevent sanctuary cities.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/1r/bills/hb2368h.pdf

https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2015/03/11/arizona-house-passes-hb2368-no-funding-of-presidential-executive-orders/

Its a short read. I believe that it will probably pass the legislature and go to the Gov who will sign it.

Basically it says that the state will provide zero support of executive orders unless also passed into federal law by the Congress and signed into effect by the POTUS.

Are the lawyers in Arizona brain dead? Have they not heard about the concept called 'The Supremacy Clause'? That the powers of the federal government hold sway over those of the individual states, whom hold sway over local townships?

All it takes is just one court case to destroy this legal bullshit. To which is asked: Why are they doing it?

Answer: For political points.

That's right, the very people that bitch against 'government misusing tax payer dollars' is misusing tax payer dollars. They did it with gay marriage, and now this. Basically, they are behaving like immature children, rather than responsible adults to which they were originally hired. Maybe they should be removed from office for defrauding the American people by the DOJ. That would be ironic....

Since it would be an executive order for the DOJ to do that....

Two points.

A Maybe they are doing this because Obama has required them to spend money they don't have.
B If the supremacy clause prevents this it would also prevent sanctuary cities.

A. Yes, because that would involve raising taxes to handle problems. Those folks want the other 49 states to foot the bill. Can you say 'Pack of Selfish Assholes'? What should I care, living in Massachusetts about Arizona's southern border? They have one nation that could access them; Massachusetts is measured in the hundreds! We have people from around the world coming into the port of Boston, MA.

B. 'Sanctuary Cities' is a concept from a focus group in the GOP. Its entirely meaningless political bullshit meant to blow 'smoke and mirrors' up the uneducated's ass! Seems to be doing a good job, isn't it?

Can a city decide how it treats illegal immigrants? Yes and No. They can insofar as they do not break legal requirements at the state and/or federal levels. Meaning, could a more liberal bastion of politics overlook illegal immigrants and focus its police forces onto more serious matters (i.e. drug smuggling)? Yes. Could a more conservative bastion of politics torture illegal immigrants for fun/information? No. Because that would be a violation of the 8th amendment.

When a person is accused of a crime by law enforcement, they are entitled to....ALL....the same protections and rights you or I get. They have the right to a lawyer at all processing steps, right to trial by jury, not to be mistreated, speedy trial, etc. Even if they are caught red handled, they are STILL afforded all these rights and protections. Do like it, blame the Founding Fathers!

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
They do not say, unlike sanctuary cities that you want to pretend don't exist, that they will ignore the law. They do not say they would defy the government. They will just use prosecutorial discretion on those things passed, not by the government but by one man.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
They do not say, unlike sanctuary cities that you want to pretend don't exist, that they will ignore the law. They do not say they would defy the government. They will just use prosecutorial discretion on those things passed, not by the government but by one man.

Sanctuary Cities do not exist anywhere except as political bullshit for the right. Unless you can point out actual laws that your not misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting?

There are many times law enforcement has looked the other way on illegal immigrants, simply because of factors. They weren't hurting anyone, breaking laws, and giving good intel on the REAL BAD GUYS.

Each city in the nation does turn over people accused of being illegal immigrants to the federal authorities. You would have to make quite a big argument to say otherwise. Hence, there is no legal concept of Sanctuary Citizes anywhere except through conservative media.

If conservatives can deal with illegal immigrants like total assholes, liberals can deal with them with some humanity. Because when the immigration laws get fixed, most of those illegal immigrants will be....MORE THAN HAPPY...to vote Democrat. An thus, the balance of power in many red states will either shift to purple or heavily to blue!

And THAT, is what you really are afraid of: Being on the receiving end of all the shit and torment you pushed out a whole section of people. If its not 'OK' for them to do it to you, they....WHY....should it be 'OK' for you to do
in the first place?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I love the piecemeal approach of the states when it comes to exec. orders.

FEMA was never created by law but by exec, orders yet I bet these states still go along with the laws passed to fund and operate that agency.

I wonder if it's because [it] now employs 2,600 people and the states love the money ?

Plus, as far as I know SF didn't follow exec, orders concerning ICE and immigrant detention. [It] didn't 'break the law.'

Are you saying that all immigration law is just executive order?
Come on you know better than that.
And if you were right then AZ has more of a right (being a state vs being a city) to ignore an executive order.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I love the piecemeal approach of the states when it comes to exec. orders.

You can tell which ones are trying to do some good on behalf of the American people, and which are pushing their own agendas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
FEMA was never created by law but by exec, orders yet I bet these states still go along with the laws passed to fund and operate that agency.

Actually the original concept of FEMA came out of the 7th session of Congress to help deal with devastating fires in Portsmouth. After that, at many times during the nation's history, more infrastructure was created to help with any number of 'global' like problems. From hurricanes to earthquakes, an organization of people and material have been around to deal with the immediate problems and plan for long term fixes.

Should really read up on FEMA's history, before spouting off on falsehoods....

Not one state of the nation would say "They dont need FEMA". Just takes one disaster....

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I wonder if it's because [it] now employs 2,600 people and the states love the money ?

No, its because the agency is set up any number of contingencies that could effect a VERY large swath of America. What do you think a single EMP explosion from 300 miles above the center point of America, would do to the nation? Or a series of 7-9 level earthquakes all within a week on the West Coast? Three category 4 or 5 hurricanes hitting the East Coast one after the other within a two week period? A terrorist attack, using a weaponized version of measles onto an unsuspecting public (i.e. Like Operation: Dark Winter)?

The agency has evolved much from its 1803 start. The people that are tasked to this government area, have to deal with the really frightening scenarios, and all the fallout that comes with it. To keep the people and the nation stable through any number of disasters effecting the nation at once. Its allowed Presidents to more effectively handle wild fires in the midwest, oil disasters in the Gulf of New Mexico and heavy snow falls in New England.

The people that REALLY dislike FEMA, are the ones that ALSO, dislike the United States of America!

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Plus, as far as I know SF didn't follow exec, orders concerning ICE and immigrant detention. [It] didn't 'break the law.'

An they should be held to the law just like everyone else. The problem on that issue, is our immigration laws are so fucked, NO ONE, can seem to figure out how to make things operate. Would take an Act of Congress to accomplish. Your seriously expecting the Republican-Controlled Congress to do anything before the election of 2016?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
What Obama did was by exec. order and still haven't read or heard any real violation of law. If it was, then it belongs at the DOJ just like 100's of cases from every admin for 50 years...that don't make it. In fact, as I've written and linked here, nothing different than what Reagan or Bush I did on immigration.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
What Obama did was by exec. order and still haven't read or heard any real violation of law. If it was, then it belongs at the DOJ just like 100's of cases from every admin for 50 years...that don't make it. In fact, as I've written and linked here, nothing different than what Reagan or Bush I did on immigration.

You need to read up on what Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan did by EO, regarding immigration/amnesty, and why. Obama's only rationale for extending deportation relief is... uh... er... the illegal immigrants are already here, so...