Wrong again, AS (Doesn’t it get even a little bit discouraging?) No single definition of someone here on a student visa classifies them as an “immigrant”, which implies an intent to remain here PERMANENTLY and become an American CITIZEN if otherwise qualified. We originally issue student visas so that some aliens may come here, get a good education and then go home and teach others how to farm, build up their infrastructure, govern their own country, fly planes, police their own people ethically, etc. Unfortunately, our “educational” system has become a series of hotbeds of radicals teaching everyone–including our own students–how to be radical anarchists, or socialist “reformers” instead.
Nonsense, AS. Your “farmer” who wants to “invite illegals onto his property” bears NO RESPONSIBILITY for that illegal’s bad behavior when it occurs…and it FREQUENTLY does. It’s SOCIETY that has to deal with it…not your so-called “sovereign farmer.” The ONLY way any nation has discovered to deal with this issue is to PREVENT those likely to rape, maim, murder or harm that nation’s citizens from entering that nation’s borders in the first place.
You apparently have a reading comprehension problem or are being obtuse and disingenuous.
The issue is lawless state political hack officials in sanctuary cities prohibiting their law enforcement officers from voluntarily cooperating with federal law enforcement officers.
Once again you are proven to be wrong as pointed out in the opinion.
Rather, the court held that Section 1373 prohibits local governmental entities and officials only from directly restricting the voluntary exchange of immigration information with the INS. Ibid. The Court found that the Tenth Amendment, normally a shield from federal power, could not be turned into “a sword allowing states and localities to engage in passive resistance that frustrates federal programs.”
STOP MAKING CRAP UP AND THEN REHASHING THAT CRAP!
Dave, you don’t analyze geography, you don’t analyze history, you don’t analyze sociology, you don’t involve our own ideological heritage.
You have a grievance, and that’s where your thinking stops. Just like any SJW type on their end.
You keep to the grievance, and you don’t incorporate any other information. That’s one-dimensional thinking, and it screams out for you to do more.
Fine, it’s a nonimmigrant visa, I was wrong on that point; but immigrant visas also expire, and also suffer from backlogs where people get lost for renewals in the backup. So you’re not avoiding the point.
Equally, people on a nonimmigrant visas, also apply for immigrant visas, and get lost the same way.
Bureaucracy, is what makes legals turn into illegals. You expect people to pick up their lives, and go away, when they were expecting to stay here (interacting with our system in. Good. Faith.), and the system ****** up.
No, I have no sympathy for bad systems, and red tape ruining peoples lives. That’s indefensible.
That’s like you defending the way California destroys restaurant owners like that of Tam’s #6, or the way DoT goes after small-time bus operators, and shuts them down, not because of safety, but because, paperwork.
If someone comes here on a student or tourist visa, all along INTENDING to stay here as an immigrant, then THEY are coming under false pretenses, and the “backlogs” of immigration visas are THEIR fault…not the government’s nor the “system’s”, other than it ALLOWS such deception in the first place.
There is a system in place for Students to apply for permanent residency. This isn’t an unusual thing to happen.
Life is complicated, and students can very well find employment here in the U.S., which means they’d have every reason to want to stay here. I know a South Korean who did just that, and it was against the wishes of his own Government.
Nope, system. If the system can’t respond appropriately to people’s lives changing, then the system wasn’t fit to manage human beings.
Micromanaging is BS and you know it.
Your “South Korean” friend likely STOLE from the South Korean government by staying here instead of going home so that South Korea could get the benefit of South Korea’s “investment” in this student. Life IS complicated, but an agreement is an agreement.
Then there should be another means to pay them back; monetize it if necessary.
If the only recourse was to go back, then the system was inflexible, and was doomed by it.
Build better systems. Lawmakers have a duty to do that.
It’s the responsibility of the South Korean government to “build a better system”…not ours. Otherwise, South Korea may just decide NOT to allow (and pay for) South Korean students to study in the U.S. South Korea has more college graduates per capita than we do…by far. But, they’ve historically educated their students in English Literature, History and Philosophy, suited for nothing but teaching other students English Lit, History or Philosophy. What they’ve always NEEDED was educated Engineers, Doctors and Architects, which is why they’ve sent their students HERE in the first place…in order to improve THEIR society.
You are the one that brought up Printz in regard to the subject matter of the thread which deals with lawless officials in sanctuary cities who are directing law enforcement officers to not cooperate with federal law enforcement officers. And now that you find the court rejects your nonsense, that “…you can’t punish officials for following the mandates of their own voters”, you try to obfuscate and deflect instead of admitting you are wrong. The fact is, if elected political hacks such as the pinko Governor of California or a local mayor engages in criminal activity, such as harboring illegal entrants, they can be prosecuted just like they can be prosecuted for violating any other statutorily forbidden activity. It’s time for Sessions to grow a spine, send federal Marshalls to California, and arrest Governor Brown for engaging activity which amounts to the harboring of illegal entrants.
“My Property” does not begin or end with my real estate, “Property” is every material thing that I possess via legal means up to and including money that I have earned.
The ridiculous example of a “Farmer” having the “Right” to take my property via force without compensation so he doesn’t have to pay his own labor costs being considered a legitimate “Right” of the farmer as long as the person he is giving my property to is invited onto the farmers land is beyond moronic.
The Extreme Left have no Right (natural or otherwise) to pillage the citizens at gunpoint for the resources they need to purchase a constituency, regardless of how many “Farmers” they can recruit into their militia.
I also consider the corporeal United States to be approximately 1/300,000,000 mine, as should every citizen.
EDIT: It doesn’t appear to be showing, but this was in reply to RET.
The way to make a quote from another post appear in yours is to highlight the text of the post you want to quote; a shaded “quote” button will appear at the upper left of the highlighted text. Click on that, and the quote will be brought up in the posting box where you type your reply.
…and that 1/300,000,000th interest is an UNDIVIDED interest, meaning I can claim ANY part of the U.S. as being MY 1/300,000,000th that’s being invaded…including your putative “farm.”
I just clicked the ‘reply’ button on RET’s post (as opposed to the ‘reply to thread’ button at the end), which usually puts an icon of an arrow pointing to the avatar of the poster to whom the reply is directed. Didn’t happen this time, and I just wanna be clear
I’m not wrong; removing grant money, isn’t the same as punishing local officials. You’re conflating those two things, and it’s wrong.
Obama had this ability with Obamacare; he was able to strip away federal funds for non-compliance from States that weren’t cooperating. Does that mean he could also throw their leadership in jail?
How about when the Mayor of Chicago actually did something illegal and had X’s carved into the runway of Meigs field, without prior approval from the FAA? While a plane was in route?
Was that something the Feds could throw him in jail for?
I’m pretty damn sure they couldn’t.
You’re treating immigration law, differently from the rest of the law, and it shows.
People on the border are a domain all of their own in the same way States and cities are; if they invite people onto their land, they have the right to do that.
Collective rights only exist as extensions of individual rights. If the collective right conflicts with an individual right, the collective right is typically in the wrong.
It’s wrong to take property away from people to build a football stadium.
It’s wrong take farmer’s crops, free of charge, and defend it because you used the money you gain from that to fund schools.
It’s wrong to write gun laws in convoluted ways that ensure their arms will be taken from them, all in the name of making the community “safer”.
Just because you have a good intentions, just because you think you’re protecting or providing for the collective, it doesn’t excuse the violation.
Until such time as someone has done something to violate the life, liberty, or property of someone else, the individual right stands.
You can’t claim other people’s land when they don’t have a problem with the immigrant being there. You don’t have a right to interfere.
Governmental stupidity, equally, does not give you an excuse. It’s sophistic reasoning to state the Government doing something it shouldn’t, gives it an excuse to take power over that issue.
Again, I’ve yet to see a single person here argue that if the government subsidized guns, it could then control or ban their supply. The right is a right, and always will be, regardless of Government actions.
If the Government’s actions create bad outcomes, then it’s the Government’s actions you need to stop.
Are you STILL claiming that illegally invading the U.S. is a “natural right,” AS? If so, we’re through. Arguing with someone delusional rarely produces a satisfactory outcome, I’ve found.
If you create an immigration system, that railroads innocent people into becoming illegals, because the system dragged its feet in giving them immigrant visas or a renewal, the system is at fault for the result. Period.
Bureaucracy is the enemy. Anyone who even half listens to talk on the “administrative state”, or who has suffered personally at its hands, understands that.