Skip to comments.Supreme Court Allows Nebraska City's Illegal Aliens Housing Ban to Stand
Posted on 05/08/2014 8:24:54 PM PDT by montag813
by Brian Hayes | Top Right News
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a lawsuit challenging a Nebraska citys ordinance that bans renting homes to illegal aliens -- a decision which could open the door to similar laws in many other cities.
Attorney Kris Kobach, who defended the Fremont, NE ordinance, said the Court's decision gives a bright green light for other cities within the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that want to adopt such laws. The circuit includes Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, and the Dakotas.
"Today we achieved final victory on behalf of the citizens of Fremont, Nebraska," said Kobach. "The ordinance...to stop employing and renting to illegal aliens was approved last year. Our victory in Court is complete. The ACLU has been defeated."
(Excerpt) Read more at toprightnews.com ...
Eric Holder harassing them in 3 ... 2 .... 1 ...
FYI, Senate candidate Ben Sasse is President of Midland Univ. in Fremont.
I know, right. The Stanley Cup finals will be held on the Sun this year.
I’d love to see this be the law everywhere.
Instead some other states give tuition and tons of free goodies to illegals;all paid for by taxes exhorted from legal citizens.
Does that make it “settled law”?
Here’s the angle of how the law works:
“The rental provision requires prospective tenants to obtain an occupancy license. They must declare their immigration status. City police then check with the federal government. If a tenant is found to be an illegal immigrant, the license is revoked.”
This avoids the problem of landlords having to somehow check the legal status of their tenants, and having to figure out what are valid forms of ID.
But the real zinger is that it nails illegals for “identity theft”, if they use a fake ID, and claim they are citizens. And “do so for gain”, so the crime can’t just be brushed off.
This housing ban, together with not hiring illegal aliens, makes it possible that the third world illegal aliens deport themselves.
American jobs for Americans!
And Iowa is in the 8th. Excellent.
The only reason that I can think that a bunch of cases like this make it to the Supremes in the first place is this. Attorneys are being indoctrinated with worthless ideas in the law schools as opposed to being taught the Constitution as the Founding States had intended for it to be understood.
More specifically, regarding the issue of housing and illegal aliens, the Founding States made the 10th Amendment to clarify that the constitution's silence about things like immigration means that such issues are automatically unique state power issues.
And taking the Constitution's silence about aliens a step further, that also means that illegal aliens have no enumerated protections.
So there you have it folks. It took me a few minutes of spare time to make this under half page post, and I wonder how many dollars were spent in legal fees to get basically the same conclusion from the Supremes.
BTW, here's my "legal" credentials.
3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition. United States v. Sprague, 1931.
Go Kris Kobach, my great Secretary of State of Kansas!
Sadly they will self-deport to California, the sanctuary state.
Wow. Nice news for the end of my day.
Moon and sun collide
News at 10....
don’t go throwing a parade. the decision had to be 5-4, hardly something to crow about. it’s great it went the way it did, but it shouild be 9-0 easy. we’re almost always one vote away from losing rights with this friggin court. and in some cases we have.
From what I remember, they tried to pass a law like this in Farmer’s Branch, Texas in 2007. I think it was declared unconstitutional by a Federal judge and that the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal. If this is true, I wonder if the people in Farmer’s Branch will revisit this issue again.
What I can guarantee is that if we would have this law in Texas, there would be a whole lot of rentals available. We are just being run over with illegals.
There was no vote: The USSC declined to hear the case, which means that the appellate court verdict favoring the law stands.
The court didn’t “get it right,” just refused to firmly establish states’ rights to protect themselves from invaders. Farmers Branch in Texas was left high and dry on their own city ordinance when the Court refused to hear their case on appeal, which was decided unfavorably by an appellate court.
When we went to my son-in-law’s graduation from legal school, where he got a parallel MBA (while supporting my daughter and three children), I noted the number of new attorneys who were lauded for working with/for an area legal aid society that specializes in helping illegals. If that’s not a sign of the degree of corruption of principles (legal and moral) we now live in, I’ not sure what is.
<><> affirmative action--no
<><> prayers opening council meetings---yes
<><> and now this.
As yefragetuwrabrumuy helpfully posted......the real zinger in the decision is that it nails illegals for identity theft, if they use a fake ID, and claim they are citizens. And do so for gain, the crime cant just be brushed off.
This zinger most assuredly can impact:
<><> getting in-college tuition, getting a raft of govt checks under multiple id's, EITC refunds, voting w/ fake id, etc etc etc.
I remember that too. See post #8, these folks may have tried a more effective angle.
Comgrats to your SOL sounds like your daughter found a winner.
As the saying goes, “Teach them sound principles and they will govern themselves.”
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Wait. Kris is our Sec of State here in Kansas. How can he also rep a Nebraska city?