Posted on 06/06/2011 9:51:15 AM PDT by montag813
BIG news for supporters of the rule of law on immigration. 2 weeks after ruling in favor of AZ's law targeting employers who hire illegals- the U.S. Supreme Court voided a lower court ruling blocking Hazelton's law that does the same and also targets landlords who rent to illegals. The Court ordered the 3rd Court of Appeals to reconsider the case in light of the pro-AZ ruling, and may signal a major legal shift in our direction.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Hagerstown, MD, and a 1000 other town did the same thing. Now they can't get rid of the SOBs. The crap landlords have spent all their money and now the housing needs years of deferred maintenance.
Also Section 8 vermin spend 24/7 in these apartments and just wear them out. Ya want section 8? OK, take a drug test.
Oh, Ok.
I think you’re correct and that means the percentage of the population on assistance is MUCH higher.
You Golden Staters are so screwed. Sorry, Jim.
If there was a Conservative diaspora from California into Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico there would not be a Democrat president for another 20 years.
So--the critics stereotype every illegal immigrant as a Mexican, and then accuse people wanting to clamp down on illegal immigration of engaging in racial profiling. It makes perfect sense. < /sarc >
I swear where I live illegals have bought homes.
And that is why they have lifetime tenure. They are where the buck stops on deciding what is law and what isn't. The Supremes need not worry about lefty demagogues who continuly come and go over the years. Go ahead you illegal alien apologist boot lickers, whine and wail away all you want.
Illegal immigrants who return after deportation commit more crimes, study finds
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-jail8-2008sep08,0,1103613.story
In L.A. County, 75% of inmates who reenter the U.S. engage in more criminal activity within a year. The rate is less for illegal immigrants who have never been ordered to leave.
Illegal immigrants who have been deported at least once from the United States are far more likely than other immigrants to repeatedly commit crimes, according to a study by the nonprofit Rand Corp.
The data indicated that illegal immigrants, overall, were not a greater crime risk, according to the study, which looked at all inmates released from Los Angeles County Jail for a month in 2002.
But among those who previously had been deported, reentered the U.S. and were arrested and released from jail, nearly 75% went on to commit another crime within a year. And 28% were arrested three or more times during the one-year period.
The recidivism rate was much lower for illegal immigrants who had not been previously deported, with 32% of those inmates being rearrested within a year and 7% arrested three or more times during that year.
Read more at latimes.com ...
________________________________________
Wow. Im shocked.
Congressman’s son caught smuggling immigrants
http://www.kvoa.com/global/Story.asp?s=9022198
Dems have a different understanding of “bringing in the votes”.
The great thing about several states enacting similar legislation will be the mass exodus to sactuary cities and states who will be quickly overwhelmed by the services provided to illegals that local taxpayers will have to foot. I love it. Run, pedro, run.
Barletta would certainly get my vote.I really like the guy.
"Requires the Attorney General to apply for a 287(g) MOU for state police;
Here's what I don't get: The US federal government, via the US Constitution, 287(g) of the Immigration law, and the RICO clauses which permit citizen claims against illegal harbor, explicitly corroborate the illegality, identification, and citation of illegal aliens. In other words our federal representatives in the past have clearly stated illegal immigration is a crime and should be addressed.
So what possible argument is their permitting illegal residence in our country? Other than blatant contemporary legislation from the outlaw judicial bench, which counters all previous legislative actions?
You can't have national representative government (our representation) clearly enacting one thing, then any bandit leftist judge come along and rule otherwise. That's blatant leftism, where the "law" is invoked for some private agenda using the denial, and forgetting, of well founded precedent.
If there is a body of people (e.g. la raza) who want amnesty for illegal US invaders then they must go to the US federal government and get fundamental federal laws reversed. No?
Target the politicians every two, four or six years.
May Chief Justice Roberts, as well as Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy stay safe and healthy.
We still have a slim chance. If we can just keep these socialists like Giuliani and Romney from winning our primaries with “ WINNER TAKE ALL” . Do NOT let this happen!! Palin is ready to explode on the political scene. The commies hate her worst of all and we need to cram her down!!! STOP WINNER TAKE ALL” STOP IT NOW!!
Lots of good towns and cities were ruined by an influx of illegal immigrants that turned these places into the same kind of cesspools they had back in their homeland. The culture of many of these people is so far different from our own that assimilation is doubtful. They are accepting of illegal behavior.
But what really needs done is publishing the names and addresses of the landlords who profit from subsidies of Section 8 housing. I know some myself who claim to be good conservative Republicans while they have their greedy little palm up to the government for their cut of the action. These people are the problem just as those who hire illegals are the problem. They ruin the country for more profits. Publish their names. Start a national website and call it a hall of shame of employers and Section 8 landlords.
great news. thanks for posting it.
Bastards.
In regards to Lou: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2730678/posts
Interesting. I think Lou should trust the Tea Party folk to out shout the disruptors rather than ban them altogether. And make sure there are plenty of peace keepers that can quickly remove those who step over the line.
Closed meetings do not cut it. The Dems tried that prior to the 2010 election.
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.