Message to the Feds:
OK. I can accept this. But I find myself still awaiting the Federal report (or State report, for that matter) on the RAMPANT VOTER FRAUD in Florida and elsewhere. And you seem to have left out the part about the dimocrats tossing out hundreds, if not thousands of absentee Military ballots in the Florida election.
And while you're at it, howsabout a report on the COMPLETE FAILURE OF THE INS (= Indifferent to National Security) to protect our borders since WE ARE AT WAR!, and muslim "brothers" continue to stream across the border to plot against my country and my families lives.
Just a few questions for the PC-hobbled Federal bureacracy, while you are so busy "investigating" voter "disenfranchisement" (...pardon me while I puke).
PS to the Feds: No need to respond, I think I know the answer. I will call back after 50,000 or so Americans are murdered in the next terrorist attack. "You" are a compelete and utter failure. Good thing I can, to an extent, take care of myself.
This is the best argument in the world for English Only! If you can't speak or read the language of the country you say you live in, then you shouldn't be able to vote in an election in that country certainly not America!
SUPREME COURT GIVES STATES IMMUNITY
WASHINGTON (AP) - 05/29/2002
The Supreme Court says states have wide immunity when federal agencies investigate complaints about them, then challenge their activities.
Tuesday's 5-4 ruling featured the same majority of justices that has decided in favor of states and against the federal government in a series of cases over the past several years.
The court sided with South Carolina in a dispute over the state port's refusal to let a casino ship dock there. The Federal Maritime Commission had no right to intervene on behalf of the ship owners, justices said.
Court conservatives, headed by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, united in upholding an appeals court ruling that state boards like the South Carolina Ports Authority have protection from federal action in courts and in federal agency administrative proceedings.
The ruling could jeopardize federal efforts to ensure worker safety, patient protections, commerce and even national security, Justice Stephen Breyer complained.
In a rare move, Breyer issued his criticism from the bench during Tuesday's court session, in addition to a written dissent. The ruling, he said, "denies the legislative and executive branches the flexibility they need to deal effectively with modern social, technological and commercial problems."
Courts have held that the Constitution's 11th Amendment gives states immunity from many kinds of lawsuits. The issue settled in this case involves the ability of an executive body - the maritime commission - to challenge state activities.
Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, said the framers of the constitution "likely did not envision the intrusion on state sovereignty at issue in today's case." He said the court is "nonetheless confident that it is contrary to their constitutional design."
"By guarding against encroachments by the federal government on fundamental aspects of state sovereignty ... we strive to maintain the balance of power embodied in our Constitution and thus to reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front," Thomas wrote.
Joining Rehnquist and Thomas were Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy.
Breyer said the majority focuses on "highly abstract" phrases like state dignity and system of federalism instead of things like liberty and due process of law. "They suffer from the disadvantage that they do not actually appear in the Constitution," he said.
The docking case dates back to 1999, when the South Carolina Ports Authority refused to let a cruise ship dock in Charleston because of a policy denying space to ships built mainly for gambling.
The 387-foot Tropic Sea spent months moored in the Charleston Harbor, and ship owners asked the federal commission to require officials to allow the ship to dock, on the grounds that they were violating a federal law that bans discrimination by port operators.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the port authority was an extension of the state of South Carolina and had immunity. The commission appealed.
Breyer's dissent was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The case is Federal Maritime Commission v. South Carolina State Ports Authority, 01-46.
On the Net: Supreme Court: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/