Posted on 03/29/2024 8:16:04 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
A federal appeals court has extended its hold on the implementation of Senate Bill 4, a Texas immigration bill that makes illegal border-crossers deportable under Texas state law.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) claims that the law, signed on Dec. 18, 2023, is necessary because the Biden administration has willfully refused to enforce our nation’s immigration laws.
The administration’s position is that S.B. 4 is preempted and violates the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution tasks the federal government with regulating immigration and controlling international borders. A “decision on removability,” the argument goes, touches “on foreign relations and must be made with one voice.”
The decision on preemption could go either way. The Supreme Court sometimes applies a canon of statutory construction known as the “presumption against preemption,” which provides that federal law should not be read as superseding states’ historic police powers “unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.”
This situation is totally unprecedented. No other state has ever made illegal border-crossing a state crime. No state has ever had such a strong reason to enact such legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
It seems like, most of the time, the Law is “whatever”.
When the president refuses to protect the country from invasion, it is the job of the governors to step up.
The whole point of the Constitution is to reign in the federal government.
State’s rights play a major factor in this.
Perhaps the court should be asked what recourse the people have when the executive chooses to not enforce existing law? Mr Biden took an oath to faithfully execute the laws yet he is clearly not doing that.
I think that the confiscation laws used against cocaine lawyers for accepting money from criminals should be used against Biden vis a vis Sam Brinkman.
It doesn’t matter. It’s an emergency so the governor can do whatever he wants. Just like covid. Declare an emergency.
“the law doesn’t apply when democrats are in control. Republicans are held accountable”
Cloward & Piven strategy - hamstring em by making them live up to their own rules while you go on doing as you want.
Accuse them of breaking the rules, while you are in fact doing just that.
No, it doesn't. The Constitution allows the federal government to make a uniform rule of naturalization for the States to follow. It does NOT give it jurisdiction over unauthorized foreign nationals crossing the border.
>I think an issue should be is Texas Law consistent with federal law? If so, it should be a moot point about who enforces it<
I believe that is the whole argument in a nutshell.
Exhibit A is RICO. There are federal RICO statutes 18 US Code Ch 96. There are also RICO statutes in Georgia that are even broader. If Trump can be prosecuted for violating the same thing as federal statutes, Texas can do the same under a slightly broader statute.
I wonder if Mensa Chairman Fani Willis gave Ken Paxton the idea.
EC
What happened?
Did the hill finally awake to its wokeness?
Doubtful.
I smell a rat...
Texas just needs to get on with it and secede. We’ve been picking at it for several years now. We just need to do it.
<>The whole point of the Constitution is to reign in the federal government.<>
That is a throwaway line at FR.
The purpose of our Constitution is beautifully expressed in its preamble.
The Constitution and all does not give us our rights.
It is meant to protect them from Government overreach by limiting what the government can and cannot do.
So, yes, that and the Bill of Rights reigns in the federal government.
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.