Posted on 06/08/2007 4:34:04 PM PDT by Loud Mime
Congress and the President are acting strangely. Why do they want to push this Immigration Reform through despite the protests of the citizens? It makes no sense, but it seems very important to them. WHY?
Read the Constitution:
Article IV:
Section 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
My point is that if there is room for all these separation of church and state lawsuits, there surely is room for States to sue the feds for violation of a guarantee in the Constitution. The unarmed invasion is costing the States, and the guarantee is made to them.
Any comments?
Interesting. I suggest posting this tomorrow morning when there’s more traffic.
Dang, I forgot tomorrow is Saturday.
ping
snowflake discussion ping?
They will claim sovereign immunity.
This is nothing more than one more article or amendment to the US Constitution that the government ignores. All three branches ignore, violate or step all over the constituion. The article requiring protecting this country means absolutely nothing to the professional politicians in Washington.
They’re doing to to ward off inflation and keep prices low for everyday Americans.
Just wanted to mention that I heard today that this is a big defeat for the White House. My comment was maybe so...however, it is a VICTORY for the American Citizens.
LOL
I don’t think you will have any trouble finding FReepers to post.
Some of my people are bitterly disappointed with the President on this issue.
A friend who’s a congressional staffer told me that they have been receiving virtually all protest calls. Just a couple of “support” calls from people who had accents.
A while back I sent a legislative proposal the Tom Tancredo which I called the “Fairness in Forgiveness Act.” If the Feds offer a tax deal to the II’s they must offer the same forgiveness to the legal citizens. A couple of his staff liked it, but I’ve seen no action so far.
This whole immigration reform is because someone didn’t do their job, so they want to legislate a remake to make themselves look good.
fair enough.....but it’s a weekend....
Have a good one yourself!
Comments? Yes — what, then, is our recourse? As in, “And if they don’t....” I keep coming back to the Declaration of Independence, where it states — ‘But when a long train of abuses ... (continues) it is their right, it is their duty, to THROW OFF SUCH A GOVERNMENT and to provide new guards for their future security.’
I say we SUE.
You can’t sue a congresscritter, they are above the law.
Okay...let’s try and not delve into the “conspiracy” theory of the fed’s incompetent responses to illegal immigration, and the current utterly incomprehensible desire to bestow amnesty.
it is certainly not some clever “scheme” to avoid lawsuits filed by states for failing to follow any part of the Constitution.
There is no such thing as a law suit based upon a provision of the Constitution . . . in and of itself.
There must first be some legislative basis for the suit in federal court. There is no statute (of which I am aware) that provides the basis for a law suit by a state against the federal government for failing to protect against “invasion.” The Constitution itself provides no legal basis for suit.
Nor is there any jurisdiction under which a state could sue the federal government for not protecting against “invasion.” (Would it were . . . but it ain’t)
For example. For an individual to sue a governmental “actor” for violation of civil rights (i.e., under color of state law), one must look to statute to provide the basis for suit: 42 U.S.C. sec. 1983, et seq., the Civil Rights Act - which provides the legal basis for bringing suit for violation of civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
sr
Thanks, you have a great weekend too!
I still think this has a lot to do with Bush’s idea of the One World Order or New World Order and the North American Union. From what I understand, we are to know something about that in Sept.
my understanding long ago was that Senators represent the governments of the States, and that the representatives of the House represent the people......and that the offices of Secretaries of State were not created to regulate drivers licenses.....
These seem like the top possibles to me:
1) The American Economy will collapse without it.
2) The money interests who need to buy our debt regularily demand it.
3) The business interest who run what’s left of America demand it.
4) It is well known that if we start doing this legally (throw them out like the law says) there will be escalating violence by them? If anything like this is it they _must_ be tossed, soon.
We need to keep calling, faxing, etc. to keep the pressure on so we don't have any more of this nonesense, AND to insist they start doing their job with the current laws. We should also insist on English as offical language, and they can have a "Sponsored Workers program". Keep calling them Illegal Aliens and even Contraband Labor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.