Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion; JCBreckenridge; PA-RIVER; PhilosopherStone1000
As I said, the essence of the ruling comes down to one sentence in the ruling:

“As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the United States.”

A lot of us think an illegal immigrant is...well, illegal!

As painful as I find this ruling, I think it is legally correct. The Congress has passed laws, and under those laws "illegal immigrants" don't exist. They are, in the words of the US Supreme Court, "removable alien[s]".

I strongly suggest all Freepers drop the term "illegal alien" and use, instead, the correct term: "removable alien". A lot of co-workers or family may be puzzled by this, but you can point out that the US Supreme Court, analyzing Federal Law, says the correct term is "removable alien" - and that the Federal Government alone has the right to decide if removal is appropriate on a case-by-case basis.

My guess is that a lot of folks will feel very uncomfortable with the idea of "removable aliens", since many of us think that it is supposed to be illegal.

I also like PA-RIVER's idea:

"So if Arizona gave every illegal immigrant a bus ticket to NYC and a promise of a Debit card for 100 dollars as they get on the bus to NYC, that would be legal. Let Chucky Schummer explain why he's an Anti Mexican bigot when he wants them to stop. Let the streets of Manhattan become a crowded Mexican slum."

My only adjustment would be to send them to Washington DC, and offer them $100/month for 6 months if they stay in DC and collect their check from an office Arizona would open in DC - the "Office of Removable Alien Support".

353 posted on 06/25/2012 8:43:34 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (A conservative can't please a liberal unless he jumps in front of a bus or off of a cliff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

Removable alien includes both legal and illegal aliens. We have around 15 million green card holders. They remain in a probationary status in the sense that if they commit a felony, they can be deported and have their permanent legal resident status revoked.


356 posted on 06/25/2012 8:49:31 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

Removable alien includes both legal and illegal aliens. We have around 15 million green card holders. They remain in a probationary status in the sense that if they commit a felony, they can be deported and have their permanent legal resident status revoked.


357 posted on 06/25/2012 8:50:55 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
By authorizing state and local officers to make warrantless arrests of certain aliens suspected of being removable, §6 too createsan obstacle to federal law. As a general rule, it is not a crime for aremovable alien to remain in the United States. The federal scheme instructs when it is appropriate to arrest an alien during the removal process. The Attorney General in some circumstances will issue awarrant for trained federal immigration officers to execute. If no federal warrant has been issued, these officers have more limited authority. They may arrest an alien for being “in the United States inviolation of any [immigration] law or regulation,” for example, but only where the alien “is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained.” §1357(a)(2).

Section 6 attempts to provide state officers with even greater arrest authority, which they could exercise with no instruction from the Federal Government. This is not the system Congress created. Federal law specifies limited circumstances in which state officers may perform an immigration officer’s functions. This includes instances where the Attorney General has granted that authority in a formal agreement with a state or local government. See, e.g., §1357(g)(1). Although federal law permits state officers to “cooperate with the Attorney General in the identification, apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens not lawfully present in the UnitedStates,” §1357(g)(10)(B), this does not encompass the unilateral decision to detain authorized by §6. Pp. 15–19

359 posted on 06/25/2012 8:55:48 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
"My only adjustment would be to send them to Washington DC, and offer them $100/month for 6 months if they stay in DC and collect their check from an office Arizona would open in DC - the "Office of Removable Alien Support"."

I like it! I wonder if Arizona could solicit contributions like those to build a border fence or pay Sheriff Joe's legal fees?

361 posted on 06/25/2012 8:58:05 AM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers

Just ship them there. It’s been done before to highlight the problem. The core problem is lack of federal enforcement. Anything AZ does to put the spotlight on Reid and Obama is going to put the attention where it belongs.

What do you think Obama is going to do when he sees newspaper headlines, “Arizona ships illegal immigrants to DC”?


365 posted on 06/25/2012 9:09:06 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas, Texas, Whisky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson