Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Illegal Immigration: A novel approach to the greatest security threat we have ^ | 1/4/03 | judicial meanz

Posted on 01/04/2003 12:43:36 AM PST by judicial meanz

A while back, I posted a thread on State Defense Forces and their role in Homeland Security. This is part two of the series.

A lot of media attention has been devoted to the problem of Illegal immigration along our Northern and Southern Borders. Calls for Federal Troops to be stationed there, the National Guard, and even hiring more Border Patrol Agents.

The Congress and the President seem to ignore the problem while crime escalates in the border regions and our citizens are threatened with serious crimes, as well as the obvious national security concerns.

Private militias have formed to protect citizens, and the problem is still ignored.

My question is: Why is this just a federal only problem? The states have the same authority as the Federal Government to station troops on the borders to stem the flow of illegal aliens, and are neglecting this role just as badly as the Feds are. The only problem is the State Governors arent facing the same heat because people dont know the military laws of their state. ( who could blame them)

Every state has the ability to use its State Militia to patrol the border and interdict illegal aliens. In some cases, they have even more authority.

State Militias are authorized under 32USC 109 of the United States Code.They are usually called "State Defense Forces" because federal statutes refer to them as such. Every state has statutes (under the shared responsibility clause of the Constitution governing military defense) to allow it to use the state militia at the discretion of the governor to do the following:

1) Invasion, insurrection, or threats of either 2) when any combination of person(s) become so powerful as to obstruct the execution of laws 3) WHEN THE GOVERNOR DETERMINES A STATE AGENCY OR AGENCIES HAVING LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONS ARE IN NEED OF HELP IN PERFORMING THESE FUNCTIONS 4) Disasters 5) Emergencies of lesser magnitude ( as determined by the Governor-this is a catch all) 6) counter-drug duties

As anyone can see, a State Governor would have every justification in the world to call out the State Militia ( State Defense Forces) to secure our borders.

About 26 states have State Defense Forces. SO far, none have state troops detailed to curb illegal immigration or secure our borders from outside threats. They could keep Federal troops free from this duty so they could be used overseas in the impending war.

Why are we letting the states off the hook here? Because no one knows about these laws, or no one cares to know about them.

I suggest we start hounding our state governors and representatives to get on the ball as well as the Feds on this issue.

TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Announcements; Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Free Republic; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last
It only took about 4 hours to do this legal research. I made my calls today to get it looked at with my state representative. Good luck FReepers!
1 posted on 01/04/2003 12:43:36 AM PST by judicial meanz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
Forgot to mention in the article-

State Defense Forces are also exempt from Posse Comitatus. They could do full law enforcement duties. Thats good to know.

Federal Troops on Title 10 missions are subject to the Posse Comitatus. They couldnt do it.

2 posted on 01/04/2003 12:46:23 AM PST by judicial meanz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
The Stein Report
Center for Immigration Studies
Numbers USA
California Coalition for Immigration Reform
Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform
"Immigrants, Not Americans, Must Adapt"

3 posted on 01/04/2003 1:15:03 AM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madfly
4 posted on 01/04/2003 4:48:31 AM PST by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
bump-right on
5 posted on 01/04/2003 5:10:10 AM PST by 1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz; Sabertooth; Tancredo Fan; madfly; Reaganwuzthebest; WRhine; FITZ; Barnacle
Here's a thread on this very topic from all the way back in 9/12/1999.

The problem was never that everyone believed that the governors of the border states couldn't take steps to secure their own borders with Mexico, it's that those same governors refused to.

Some believed that the governors from the border states were hesitant to do this, because it would lead to a confrontation with the federal government, or they were afraid of being called racists. Yada, yada, yada.

We all know that's not true, beyond a shadow of a doubt, now.

A former, Republican, border state governor is the sitting President of The United States. The Congress is in the control of the Republicans and still not a damn thing is being done to secure our borders.

If anything, our border security is being deliberately undermined further.

Posse Comitatus and The Law

The governors of the border states are being elected by the same tidal wave of illegal immigrants that we'd be asking them to stop. The same governors that just returned from a meeting with Mexican state governors, where they discussed ways to open our borders further, are the ones we'd be petitioning to stop this madness. Fat chance of that, anymore.

The governors of the border states are hopelessly, pro-open borders, pro-illegal immigration, one (3rd) worlder, Liberal, Democrats or RINOs. That's why the newly legal and fraudulently voting illegal aliens elected them.

Look who was just elected governor of Arizona. Name one border state governor that won't resist the efforts of their concerned citizens to have their National Guard sent to the borders.

IMHO, the only reason the governors of the border states would voluntarily send their respective National Guard troops to the borders for would be to arrest or kill the courageous members of the citizens patrols and ranchers that have come together to resist the hoards of illegal immigrants that are pouring over our borders, daily.

Don't get me wrong. Keep the heat on every elected representative you can. But don't make the mistake in believing that it hasn't been done up until this point.

IMO though, the pressure to secure our borders will have to come from the citizens of the states that don't want to have the same things happen to their states that have happened to the border states.

As I said on another thread, 'The United States has gone from being the land of opportunity to being the land of illegal alien opportunists.'

And a lot of the pandering politicians from both parties are complicit.

Tom Tancredo in 2004!

I hope none of you mind my 'Pinging' you to this thread. I don't do too much 'Pinging' anymore, because Madfly, Tancredo Fan and Sabertooth 'Ping' almost the identical list of Freepers to the very same threads. Anyway, LMK.

6 posted on 01/04/2003 7:10:16 AM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz

As Paula Harvey said (paraphrasing, here), "This great nation was once a melting pot. Today, it has become a pressure cooker."
7 posted on 01/04/2003 7:14:13 AM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free the USA; B4Ranch; Tancredo Fan; Marine Inspector; Ajnin; agitator; Tancred; Spiff; backhoe; ...
Yes, but, but, when it comes to any Border Issue, our governor's are united with the border governors from Mexico and belong the Border Governors' Conference, the Western Governors' Association and many bi-national groups.

I doubt we will see any independent action from any of our State Border Governors. I figure this is why Tom Tancredo had to fly down to southern Arizona to take the issue of border incursions to Washington. And this all stinks.

Does anyone know any more about these guvhah gangs? I have to agree with B4Ranch's idea of the Sheriff's power in the counties.

The University of Texas at Brownsville was host for the XVI Border Governors' Conference in June 1998. The SETB Lecture Hall was the main site for this meeting between the governors from both sides of the Mexican and US border.
(recognize anyone?)

The Border Governors and the Western Governors' Association don't include "immigration" in the following. There is some mention of it further down in the document, but it is obvious that this is not one of their priorities, when influencing Government policy. There is a lot of discussion and planning for the environmental conditions along the border, which reeks of Agenda 21 to me. Arizona has a lot of "21" programs, as I'm sure do all the Western States, as well as the nation.

Policy Resolution 02-15
WGA Relations with Mexico and the Border Governors' Conference
Annual Meeting
June 25, 2002
Phoenix, Arizona
SPONSORS: Governors Hull, Davis and Perry

1. Mexico has long shared a preeminent trade, diplomatic and cultural relationship with the United States. This relationship was further enhanced with the enactment of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which became effective on January 1, 1994. NAFTA formally linked the economies and trade relationships of the United States, Mexico, and Canada.

2. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 have brought a new focus to the international boundaries of the U.S. and to the need to ensure that security issues are of paramount concern.

3. Western states, and in particular the United States-Mexico border states of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and California, are substantial participants in the Mexican market and have supported the full implementation of NAFTA throughout North America. Western states also have been supportive of U.S.- Mexican federal relations across the range of topics addressed by these two great nations.

• 4. There has been a substantial increase in passenger and commercial vehicle traffic at border crossings between the U.S. and Mexico accompanying the implementation of the NAFTA. The increase in vehicle traffic has often resulted in significant delays in traversing the border. These delays have impacts on both environmental quality and the cost of doing business. •

5. Along with the Western Governors’ Association (WGA), one of the groups that has worked to expand and strengthen bilateral relationships between U.S. and Mexican border states is the U.S.-Mexico Border Governors Conference (BGC). The BGC includes the four U.S. and six Mexican border Governors whose states comprise the nearly 2,000 mile U.S.-Mexico border. The BGC has held binational conferences since 1980 to address issues of trade, investment, economic development, public health, the environment, tourism, transportation, and agriculture. The border Governors have conveyed their positions through joint declarations and policy initiatives.

6. During the past eight years, the WGA has worked specifically to build binational relationships in the border region between states through its Border Environment Dialogue Program, including its series of Ten State Retreats hosted in conjunction with different U.S. and Mexican border states on an annual basis, and its coordination support of the Environment session of the BGC. The focus of this program has been on strategic alliances and partnering needed to improve environmental and health conditions in the border region. Ultimately, WGA in conjunction with the BGC, aims to establish a permanent coordination mechanism between the 10 states on environmental matters.

1. WGA shall convey this resolution to the Mexican border Governors, President Fox, President Bush, the following Mexican officials: Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Foreign Affiars, Secretary of Environmental and Natural Resources, Secretary of Transportation and Communications, and the National Ecological Institute, and the following U.S. administration officials:

Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of Treasury, Secretary of Transportation, and the EPA Administrator.
WGA will also convey this resolution to Majority and Minority leadership of the Senate and House of Representatives.

This resolution was originally adopted in 1999 as WGA policy resolution 99-028. (as directed by Staff Council the draft incorporates resolution 99-007)

Approval of a WGA resolution requires an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Board of the Directors present at the meeting. Dissenting votes, if any, are indicated in the resolution.

The Board of Directors is comprised of the governors of
Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, California, Colorado, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.

All policy resolutions are posted on the WGA Web site ( or you may request a copy by writing or calling:

Western Governors’ Association
1515 Cleveland Place, Suite 200
Denver, CO 80202-5114
Ph: (303) 623-9378
Fax: (303) 534-7309
F:\02RESOS\02 Annual Mtg\US_Mexico Border Relations.wpd

Full text .pdf at this link:

8 posted on 01/04/2003 7:16:21 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
9 posted on 01/04/2003 7:17:44 AM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
Good post, 4F. We are on the same page, unforuntately.

oops, sorry for the double pings. I spent a lot of time on my post.

10 posted on 01/04/2003 7:19:08 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom

Tom Tancredo
American Statesman

11 posted on 01/04/2003 7:22:20 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cindy
12 posted on 01/04/2003 7:37:53 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
"Tom Tancredo in 2004!"

Tancredo has been getting a good deal of air time lately:
Is there any kind of 'draft Tancredo', or 'consider Tancredo', or 'encourage him to run' movement that might cause the Pub's and our president to pay attention?

13 posted on 01/04/2003 7:38:53 AM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: norton; Tancredo Fan; Tom_Tancredo_Fan
I'm not aware of any organized movement underway to draft Tom Tancredo for a run for President, but I am aware that a lot of people have sent their personal requests to that effect along with their campaign contributions.

Maybe Tancredo Fan or Tom_Tancredo_Fan know of any organized efforts to draft Tom Tancredo.

14 posted on 01/04/2003 8:07:31 AM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom
15 posted on 01/04/2003 8:15:19 AM PST by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
And the FEDS should fund these efforts. The VARIOUS STATES must be allocated part of the INS and/or Homeland Security budget to do this.
16 posted on 01/04/2003 8:16:54 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madfly
"Good post, 4F. We are on the same page, unfortunately."

Thanks for the compliment, Madfly. That was a nice post of yours, as well.

It's an honor and a pleasure to share a page with you. ;)

What in the name of 'Founding Fathers' and 'The Alamo' are those lunatics doing with image of the American Flag and the Mexican Flag all snaked together like that?

17 posted on 01/04/2003 8:19:01 AM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 4Freedom; All
Have you or anyone listened to Rush Limbaugh lately? I don't listen to him much, but it's going around he's now supporting the idea of amnesty for all illegals using the lame "George Bush is a great war president" excuse to justify it.

Looks to me if it is true the party is pressuring him into this sellout position. He has been a staunch opponent of amnesties and illegal immigration as far as I knew, so I'm finding this sudden 180 kind of odd.

18 posted on 01/04/2003 8:22:58 AM PST by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
Why then are we not in our state Capitols raising Cain?
19 posted on 01/04/2003 8:30:23 AM PST by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: judicial meanz
The Congress is in the control of the Republicans and still not a damn thing is being done to secure our borders.

Among other needful changes!

Sorry, surprise, surprise!

20 posted on 01/04/2003 8:39:53 AM PST by VOYAGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-83 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

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