Replies

Don’t you mean the difference between a bush league chamber of commerce worshiping republiCAN’T and a strict constituionalist?
The constituition grants the fed the right to regulate immigration.
Period.
End of discussion.

Now if you wanted to by pass that pesky constitution thingie, you would have a team coming with things that will pass must, say, stopping people and asking for ID. If you do not have valid state recognized ID, we transport you back to the immigration holding area.
Cloward/Piven.
Overload the system.

But, noooo... instead we get bombarded with BS that we KNOW will get shot down by the courts.
This is intentional.
You don’t get votes by solving the problem.
You get votes by pissing people off!!!!
You are being played.
You are being played by the bush league chamber of commecc worshiping republiCAN’Ts that not only want but support the illegal wave.
Stop being played.
Stop being stupid.
Demand intellegence.
Demand results.

Don’t you mean the difference between a bush league chamber of commerce worshiping republiCAN’T and a strict constituionalist?

No, I mean the difference between a conservative who thinks that the executive branch needs to apply the laws passed by Congress and not ignore them, and a elitist federalist who thinks the federal government can do anything it wants because the federalists say so.

The constituition grants the fed the right to regulate immigration. Period. End of discussio

The word "immigration" appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution. Federalist judges have found the federal government has a right to regulate immigration, but a Jeffersonian view of that document is that it is reserved to the states through the Tenth Amendment. We just haven't had a Jeffersonian Supreme Court Justice in ages.

Now if you wanted to by pass that pesky constitution thingie, you would have a team coming with things that will pass must, say, stopping people and asking for ID. If you do not have valid state recognized ID, we transport you back to the immigration holding area.

No, it's really very simple. The owner of land has a right to control passage over that land, unless some easement is recognized by law. So, if the land is crossed without permission, it's trespassing and Texas and other states have a right to criminally prosecute those who are trespassing on the land. Unless the Federal government has paid just compensation to the owners of the land to allow foreigners to cross private, or state owned property, the feds need to shut up about federalism. This is about trespassing under state law. American citizens can be prosecuted for not exiting the U.S. from an approved border crossing. Yet, you think its OK for foreigners to enter without using the border crossings. It's like a burglar breaking in a house by the window and not knocking on the front door. It's that simple.