Justice Dept Files Suit Against Arizona.

[Stealth694]

The Justice Dept finally pulled the plug and filed a suit against Arizona on the Illegal Immigration Law Arizona passed;

The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, law enforcement sources said Monday.

The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption," which is based on the Constitution's supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton first revealed last month that the Justice Department intended to sue Arizona, and department lawyers have been preparing their case, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the government has not announced its plans. The filing is expected to include declarations from other U.S. agencies saying that the Arizona law would place a undue burden on their ability to enforce immigration laws nationwide, because Arizona police are expected to refer so many illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.

But lawyers who helped draft the Arizona legislation have expressed doubt that a preemption argument would prevail. The law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April, is scheduled to take effect later this month.

The Comments on this are varied but are usually on the waste of time and energy to block a law that is already on the Federal books.

This is going to get Nasty.

[Thorne]

Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

So why isn't the Federal Government enforcing those laws? Is there a counter-suit possibility here?

This is going to get Nasty.

Oh yeah! Anything to divert public attention from the failing economy and failing foreign policies.

[denuseri]

Here is the original thread on this topic for those that are interested:

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/sh...ation?p=866321

And here is the second thread started on the topic:

http://www.bdsmlibrary.com/forums/sh...-Immigrant-Law

[Stealth694]

[B]Smile, I don't Think so Thorne:

If anything this will focus people on how this administration is focused on the mediocre or idiotic issues before they want to tackle the real issues.

With the Drug War in Mexico and the Violence there,, its becoming more and more Dangerous for everyone near the border.
Plus,My Mother worked for the Pheonix Police for 20 yrs and she said if you want to find a Mexican Crook, look for a Mexican Cop,
most of the Mexican Govt is either on the Drug Cartels Payroll or just don't care.
[B]

[TwistedTails]

because Arizona police are expected to refer so many illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

If nothing else this case will illustrate the incompetence of the Federal Government in doing their duty to protect the citizens of the State of Arizona. If they were doing their job, we would not need the law.

[Thorne]

If they were doing their job, we would not need the law.

Am I mistaken in understanding that the Arizona law is merely a tool which allows their police officers to actually enforce existing Federal laws?

[TwistedTails]

Am I mistaken in understanding that the Arizona law is merely a tool which allows their police officers to actually enforce existing Federal laws?

The short answer is, No, you are not mistaken.

[DuncanONeil]

No! You are not mistaken. That is exactly what it is.
I find it hard to believe that you of all people have not actually read the law.

Am I mistaken in understanding that the Arizona law is merely a tool which allows their police officers to actually enforce existing Federal laws?

[Thorne]

No! You are not mistaken. That is exactly what it is.
I find it hard to believe that you of all people have not actually read the law.

I spent a month one weekend trying to work my way through the laws regarding transportation of hazardous materials, with nothing to show for it but a headache. Since then I try to avoid actually reading the actual laws, relying on interpretations of those I trust (from both sides of the issues whenever possible). Besides, not living in AZ, the actual wording of the law is not that important to me. The fact that the Feds want to quash it is enough to tell me it's probably a good law.

[DuncanONeil]

What would you like to know about Title 49? Maybe I could help.

I spent a month one weekend trying to work my way through the laws regarding transportation of hazardous materials, with nothing to show for it but a headache. Since then I try to avoid actually reading the actual laws, relying on interpretations of those I trust (from both sides of the issues whenever possible). Besides, not living in AZ, the actual wording of the law is not that important to me. The fact that the Feds want to quash it is enough to tell me it's probably a good law.

[DuncanONeil]

The fact that it is only 16 pages makes the hue and cry against it even less understandable.
In spite of my opposition to the health care bill I did not read every page. Especially since so much of it is duplication.

Heard some good comments today, asking why the DOJ is not suing governments that have clearly stated that they will not enforce, or aid in the enforcement of Federal law.

I spent a month one weekend trying to work my way through the laws regarding transportation of hazardous materials, with nothing to show for it but a headache. Since then I try to avoid actually reading the actual laws, relying on interpretations of those I trust (from both sides of the issues whenever possible). Besides, not living in AZ, the actual wording of the law is not that important to me. The fact that the Feds want to quash it is enough to tell me it's probably a good law.

[steelish]

Am I mistaken in understanding that the Arizona law is merely a tool which allows their police officers to actually enforce existing Federal laws?

You're exactly right. That is what the law is about. Not only doesn it allow Arizona officers to enforce an existing Federal Law, but it also points out (to the remainder of the U.S.) that the Federal government is dropping the ball.

(which is likely the REAL reason for the lawsuit)

[DuncanONeil]

You're exactly right. That is what the law is about. Not only doesn it allow Arizona officers to enforce an existing Federal Law, but it also points out (to the remainder of the U.S.) that the Federal government is dropping the ball.

(which is likely the REAL reason for the lawsuit)

But the Government already dropped the ball on immigration when it did not take to task the localities that have expressly stated that they will not enforce existing Federal law or assist Federal agencies in the enforcement of same.

[steelish]

But the Government already dropped the ball on immigration when it did not take to task the localities that have expressly stated that they will not enforce existing Federal law or assist Federal agencies in the enforcement of same.

Yes, true. I was simply reiterating what the state legislature in Arizona said during an interview. They are trying to "nudge" the Federal government into doing their job. Arizona has become frustrated with the federal government's lack of interest in protecting America's borders, therefore, they decided to do something about it. Kudos to them.

[MMI]

Can't Arizona get round the "federal" problem by simply closing its borders to everyone who doesn't come from Arizona?

Over here, in the EU, therfe is no "supremacy" rule. In fact member states jealously guard the supremacy of their individual jurisdictions, and only in certain circumstances can European law override national law.

[TwistedTails]

Can't Arizona get round the "federal" problem by simply closing its borders to everyone who doesn't come from Arizona?

Over here, in the EU, therfe is no "supremacy" rule. In fact member states jealously guard the supremacy of their individual jurisdictions, and only in certain circumstances can European law override national law.

It has been a long time since I took government classes, but if I understand correctly this is not something we ( The State of Arizona ) can do. Very few U.S. states were sovereign prior to becoming states. Most were created from federal territories, and so do not have full sovereign rights, like the Republic of Texas just as an example.

[Stealth694]

It has been a long time since I took government classes, but if I understand correctly this is not something we ( The State of Arizona ) can do. Very few U.S. states were sovereign prior to becoming states. Most were created from federal territories, and so do not have full sovereign rights, like the Republic of Texas just as an example.

This comes under a grey area I think Twisted, There is a Federal Law that should be upheld now, the Arizona law allows police to ask for Immigration ID, if they pull over someone on a legitimate charge ( Not Politically Correct). This would be under state sovereignty I believe, the state has a right to enforce laws already on the book. 10th Ammendment. I believe the Arizonia law is more a law to intimidate Illegals to go to other states, and the other states do not want the Arizonia Illegals. As for Racial Profiling,,, we had an incident like that in Wisconsin several years ago, Blacks were saying they were being racially profiled by the police because of their color, it was later proven that the Police had pulled over cars that lacked, License Plates, current registration, bumpers, tail lights, were total junk and not considered safe. Ironically blacks were driving them.

[TwistedTails]

This comes under a grey area I think Twisted, There is a Federal Law that should be upheld now, the Arizona law allows police to ask for Immigration ID, if they pull over someone on a legitimate charge ( Not Politically Correct). This would be under state sovereignty I believe, the state has a right to enforce laws already on the book. 10th Ammendment. I believe the Arizonia law is more a law to intimidate Illegals to go to other states, and the other states do not want the Arizonia Illegals. As for Racial Profiling,,, we had an incident like that in Wisconsin several years ago, Blacks were saying they were being racially profiled by the police because of their color, it was later proven that the Police had pulled over cars that lacked, License Plates, current registration, bumpers, tail lights, were total junk and not considered safe. Ironically blacks were driving them.

The response you quoted was a response as to why Arizona could not close its borders like a E.U. state could. It didn't have much to do with the immigration law.

The immigration law has been discussed to exhaustion in another thread. That is why I gave the "short answer" and declined to address the nuances of the law in this one.

Cheers,
Twisted

[DuncanONeil]

You live in WI? MSN or MKE?

This comes under a grey area I think Twisted, There is a Federal Law that should be upheld now, the Arizona law allows police to ask for Immigration ID, if they pull over someone on a legitimate charge ( Not Politically Correct). This would be under state sovereignty I believe, the state has a right to enforce laws already on the book. 10th Ammendment. I believe the Arizonia law is more a law to intimidate Illegals to go to other states, and the other states do not want the Arizonia Illegals. As for Racial Profiling,,, we had an incident like that in Wisconsin several years ago, Blacks were saying they were being racially profiled by the police because of their color, it was later proven that the Police had pulled over cars that lacked, License Plates, current registration, bumpers, tail lights, were total junk and not considered safe. Ironically blacks were driving them.

[DuncanONeil]

How is the AZ law "illegal"? Have you read it? The law make no preemption of Federal law. I suspect that the real reason the administration does not want to see this is they prefer to not enforce the law they are so jealously guarding. Add to that the administration appears to have no qualms about RI doing the same thing for the past two years!
Further, why is it that those that desire no enforcement of immigration always liken "reasonable suspicion" to the equivalent of a roadside random drunk stop? Reasonable suspicion means just exactly what is says. And everyone dismisses the requirement for a valid legal reason for the initial contact.
How about the DOJ filing suits against all those cities that are actually in violation of Federal law by voluntary non-compliance?

The Justice Dept finally pulled the plug and filed a suit against Arizona on the Illegal Immigration Law Arizona passed;

The Justice Department has decided to file suit against Arizona on the grounds that the state's new immigration law illegally intrudes on federal prerogatives, law enforcement sources said Monday.

The lawsuit, which three sources said could be filed as early as Tuesday, will invoke for its main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption," which is based on the Constitution's supremacy clause and says that federal law trumps state statutes. Justice Department officials believe that enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, the sources said.

A federal lawsuit will dramatically escalate the legal and political battle over the Arizona law, which gives police the power to question anyone if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is an illegal immigrant. The measure has drawn words of condemnation from President Obama and Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and opposition from civil rights groups. It also has prompted at least five other lawsuits. Arizona officials have urged the Obama administration not to sue.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton first revealed last month that the Justice Department intended to sue Arizona, and department lawyers have been preparing their case, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the government has not announced its plans. The filing is expected to include declarations from other U.S. agencies saying that the Arizona law would place a undue burden on their ability to enforce immigration laws nationwide, because Arizona police are expected to refer so many illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

The preemption doctrine has been established in Supreme Court decisions, and some legal experts have said such a federal argument likely would persuade a judge to declare the law unconstitutional.

But lawyers who helped draft the Arizona legislation have expressed doubt that a preemption argument would prevail. The law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer (R) in April, is scheduled to take effect later this month.

The Comments on this are varied but are usually on the waste of time and energy to block a law that is already on the Federal books.

This is going to get Nasty.

[Stealth694]

I just watched an interview on CNN: A woman and her family were going to have to move out of Arizona because of this law, she had been in the country Illegally for 18 years. What made me think was, 18 years?? why do they have to do the interview in SPANISH???

This is one of the main reasons Illegal Immigrants are becoming the focus for this law, they do not want to intigrate with the United States.. During the Demonstrations in Arizona they were numerable Mexican Flags, If they want to become citizens, why weren't they showing American Flags? In California, some Hispanic High School students lowered the American Flag and Raised the Mexican Flag, they thought it was funny and shows their heritage.

If being Mexican is so important why do they come here?

[DuncanONeil]

Do you play Torq?

Perhaps all of this is a ploy by the Mexican Government to take over the portions of the land they lost in earlier centuries?

I just watched an interview on CNN: A woman and her family were going to have to move out of Arizona because of this law, she had been in the country Illegally for 18 years. What made me think was, 18 years?? why do they have to do the interview in SPANISH???

This is one of the main reasons Illegal Immigrants are becoming the focus for this law, they do not want to intigrate with the United States.. During the Demonstrations in Arizona they were numerable Mexican Flags, If they want to become citizens, why weren't they showing American Flags? In California, some Hispanic High School students lowered the American Flag and Raised the Mexican Flag, they thought it was funny and shows their heritage.

If being Mexican is so important why do they come here?

[MMI]

Wikipedia tells us

According to the 2000 census,[9] the main languages by number of speakers older than five are:

1. English - 215 million
2. Spanish - 28 million
3. American Sign Language - 2.0 million
4. Chinese languages - 2.0 million + (mostly Cantonese speakers, with a growing group of Mandarin speakers)
5. French - 1.6 million
6. German - 1.4 million (High German) + German dialects like Hutterite German, Texas German, Pennsylvania German, Plautdietsch
7. Tagalog - 1.2 million + (Most Filipinos may also know other Philippine languages, e.g. Ilokano, Pangasinan, Bikol languages, and Visayan languages)
8. Vietnamese - 1.01 million
9. Italian - 1.01 million
10. Korean - 890,000
11. Russian - 710,000
12. Polish - 670,000
13. Arabic - 610,000
14. Portuguese - 560,000
15. Japanese - 480,000
16. French Creole - 450,000 (mostly Louisiana Creole French - 334,500)
17. Greek - 370,000
18. Hindi - 320,000
19. Persian - 310,000
20. Urdu - 260,000
21. Gujarati - 240,000
22. Armenian - 200,000

Are American signers to be regarded as unAmerican because they don't speak English?

Why stop there? Why not insist on Anglo-Saxon. After all, look at Iceland. That's pretty much a "pure" country (mostly Scandinavian stock, but a bit of Irish blood, too) speaking a language that hasn't changed very much for over ten centuries.

Although the USA does not have "official" languages, it has a number of States which are unofficially bi-lingual, and one state which is officially bi-lingual. Four Territories are also officially bi- or tri-lingual, but they don't count - they're only colonies, not proper Americans.

[Thorne]

Are American signers to be regarded as unAmerican because they don't speak English?

In the first place, American Sign Language is English. Just not spoken English.

In the second place, no one is claiming that someone is not American just because English is not their first language. But how does someone live in a country for 18 years without learning the language? If you were to emigrate to, for example, Finland, would you expect the Finnish government to provide English language signs and documents to ease your way? Or would you learn Finnish?

And let's not forget, regardless of the reasons, we are speaking of illegal immigrants here. Not just Hispanics, but ALL illegals. I defy anyone to name any other country in the world which allows illegal immigrants to affect government policy! It's not only stupid to do so, it's insane!

[MMI]

In the first place, American Sign Language is English. Just not spoken English.

In the second place, no one is claiming that someone is not American just because English is not their first language. But how does someone live in a country for 18 years without learning the language? If you were to emigrate to, for example, Finland, would you expect the Finnish government to provide English language signs and documents to ease your way? Or would you learn Finnish?

And let's not forget, regardless of the reasons, we are speaking of illegal immigrants here. Not just Hispanics, but ALL illegals. I defy anyone to name any other country in the world which allows illegal immigrants to affect government policy! It's not only stupid to do so, it's insane!

It's not for me to contradict you, Thorne, but, according to the US Census-takers, ASL is another language. I simply defer to their greater wisdom.

What puzzles me is why everyone is making such a fuss because someone else speaks the nation's second language (eventually to be its first) - as if that, in itself, was reason for deportation. It's not at all surprising that a Spanish speaker would speak Spanish in a state that belonged to Spain or has been under Spanish influence from the middle of the 16th century until about 160 years ago.

I can assure you that the British government publishes documents in a variety of European and Asian languages ... even Celtic languages on occasion, and runs Asian and Celtic language radio & tv stations, too. If there were sufficient demand, I'm sure the BBC would open a new Spanish channel, too. If a speaker of a foreign language comes over here and discovers he needs help to avail himself of the vast array of benefits and services we gladly provide to such parasites (for no other reason than we're insane) then there is a vast array of leaflets and other publications in every tongue you can imagine so that he doesn't have to miss out on a single week's benefits for lack of understanding!

Why, we even have road signs in French, German, and God knows what other languages reminding these interlopers to drive on the left - although our free health service is always available in case of accident.

And, Thorne, I shall be visiting Finland shortly. I expect to be able to confirm that most Finns will speak to me in English, and that there will be many signs in airports, hotels and elsewhere in English designed to help me get about. If I visit museums, cathedrals or other sights, there will be brochures in English explaining the exhibits etc.

Finally, I don't believe ther is a single government in the world that doesn't have an immigration policy affected by the immigrants it wants to receive and those it doesn't. Basically, if you're wealthy or have a special skill, you're welcome. If you're poor and uneducated, you can just fuck off.

[steelish]

It's not for me to contradict you, Thorne, but, according to the US Census-takers, ASL is another language. I simply defer to their greater wisdom.

Basically, if you're wealthy or have a special skill, you're welcome. If you're poor and uneducated, you can just fuck off.

ROFLAMO! If you view the US Census-takers as having great wisdom, that explains a lot.

As to that second statement, I guess you aren't familiar with the words at the base of the Statue of Liberty.

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door." by Emma Lazarus.

We INVITE those who are poor, uneducated. Basically - those who are "outcasts" for their poverty in other nations. There are thousands upon thousands who have come here LEGALLY and made a good living for themselves. America is a land of opportunity FOR THOSE WHO ARE WILLING TO WORK FOR WHAT THEY WANT.

Before it was even put in place, the Arizona immigration law was already working because illegal immigrants were self deporting themselves to avoid prosecution. It does seem strange that a court would be so afraid of a law that specifically forbids law enforcement from racially profiling - but that wasn't enough for the courts (and a Clinton appointed Judge) to jump to the rescue of the paranoid left - who worry about kids being scooped up while they enjoy an ice cream cone.

[Thorne]

It's not for me to contradict you, Thorne, but, according to the US Census-takers, ASL is another language. I simply defer to their greater wisdom.

I guess it's just semantics. I'll concede the point.

What puzzles me is why everyone is making such a fuss because someone else speaks the nation's second language (eventually to be its first) - as if that, in itself, was reason for deportation.

It's not because they speak Spanish, but because they haven't bothered to learn to speak English as well. Again, if I were moving to another country, I would make damned sure I learned the dominant language of that country. It only makes sense.

If a speaker of a foreign language comes over here and discovers he needs help to avail himself of the vast array of benefits and services we gladly provide to such parasites (for no other reason than we're insane) then there is a vast array of leaflets and other publications in every tongue you can imagine so that he doesn't have to miss out on a single week's benefits for lack of understanding!

See? By your own admission, it's insane to provide benefits for every person who enters the country, whether legally or not. That's all we've been saying: DON'T provide those benefits, DON'T make things easy for them, DON'T allow them to stay illegally. IT'S INSANE!!

And, Thorne, I shall be visiting Finland shortly. I expect to be able to confirm that most Finns will speak to me in English, and that there will be many signs in airports, hotels and elsewhere in English designed to help me get about. If I visit museums, cathedrals or other sights, there will be brochures in English explaining the exhibits etc.

Naturally. You're a tourist, and they want tourist money. I don't have any problem with that. I don't have a problem with companies who provide signs and ads in both English and Spanish. It only makes economic sense. What I object to is the government providing aid to criminals (aka illegal aliens) who have not, and will not, payed into the system they are destroying.

Finally, I don't believe ther is a single government in the world that doesn't have an immigration policy affected by the immigrants it wants to receive and those it doesn't. Basically, if you're wealthy or have a special skill, you're welcome. If you're poor and uneducated, you can just fuck off.

Exactly! So why do you assume that the US should be any different. Why castigate the American people because they want the same policies as any other country. Despite the fact that our government doesn't care to enforce those policies. There are enough poor and uneducated people in this country without importing more.

[chuck]

I came across this article. If the author is correct, why hasn't this point been brought up previously? Also if the author is correct, this shows how the Constitution is no longer relevant.

ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial

FTA (emphasis and formating lost in the cut and paste):

Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction…

“Original” jurisdiction means the power to conduct the “trial” of the case (as opposed to hearing an appeal from the judgment of a lower court).
[...snip...]
Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you
[...snip...]
...Attorney General Eric Holder filed the case in a court which is specifically stripped of jurisdiction to hear it!
[...snip...]
Article IV, Sec. 4, requires the federal government to protect each of the States against invasion.Not only is the Obama regime refusing to perform this specific Constitutional duty - it seeks to prohibit the Sovereign STATE of Arizona from defending itself! This lawlessness on the part of the Obama regime is unmatched in the history of Our Country.

[DuncanONeil]

I guess it's just semantics. I'll concede the point.

I won't concede! The question as asked by the Census is "Does this person speak a language other than English at home?". Based on that and the other two questions it is to develop an understanding of how people are doing at becoming American!

It's not because they speak Spanish, but because they haven't bothered to learn to speak English as well. Again, if I were moving to another country, I would make damned sure I learned the dominant language of that country. It only makes sense.

I have recently learned that many, if not most, of the illegals have Spanish as a second language!

Naturally. You're a tourist, and they want tourist money. I don't have any problem with that. I don't have a problem with companies who provide signs and ads in both English and Spanish. It only makes economic sense. What I object to is the government providing aid to criminals (aka illegal aliens) who have not, and will not, payed into the system they are destroying.

I can not speak to Finland though I can get info on Sweden as my son recently visited there. I do know about Japan. You can find sign written in English letters but that is about it. Most all highway signs are in Kanjii, while signs on transit platforms can be found in Kanjii, Kana, and Romajii. Romajii is likely the only that you will recognize. if it is the name of the town you might be able to know what to do. I am sure you can read "Fuji", "Tokyo" and the like but they are not in English! But pray tell what is 東京 or 日本 or even 中川?(

[MMI]

I guess it's just semantics. I'll concede the point.

Thank-you

It's not because they speak Spanish, but because they haven't bothered to learn to speak English as well. Again, if I were moving to another country, I would make damned sure I learned the dominant language of that country. It only makes sense.

Good for you.

I don't know if we still have any monoglot Gaelic or Welsh speakers, but it's not so long ago that we did. Should they have been made to learn English, simply because most people spoke that language? I do believe there are native indians in USA who don't speak English. What are you going to do about that?

We do have second generation Asian families in this country who do not speak English: they do not need to. Their friends and acquaintances speak their language, so why should they have to learn an alien language. If they need to communicate with a monoglot English speaker, they'll find an interpreter (who will also be an imigrant). Wouldn't it be a courtesy if some of us learned their language instead?

The trouble with Americans is that they have inherited from us that dreadful Anglo-Saxon arrogance which leads them to believe that everyone else must learn English, while all an English speaker has to do when in a foreign country is shout louder. All we've succeeded in doing is erase countless cultures.

Which language would you have everyone in India speak? What about China? Should everyone be made to learn Cantonese?

See? By your own admission, it's insane to provide benefits for every person who enters the country, whether legally or not. That's all we've been saying: DON'T provide those benefits, DON'T make things easy for them, DON'T allow them to stay illegally. IT'S INSANE!!

Evidently, my sarcasm went straight over your head.

Naturally. You're a tourist, and they want tourist money. I don't have any problem with that. I don't have a problem with companies who provide signs and ads in both English and Spanish. It only makes economic sense. What I object to is the government providing aid to criminals (aka illegal aliens) who have not, and will not, payed into the system they are destroying.

They are NOT fucking destroying your system, and if only you'd let them, they'd contribute just as much as your forefathers did after they entered America. It's the blinkered, isolationist, self-righteous bigots who want to keep America pure who will destroy the system.

Exactly! So why do you assume that the US should be any different. Why castigate the American people because they want the same policies as any other country. Despite the fact that our government doesn't care to enforce those policies. There are enough poor and uneducated people in this country without importing more.

Why? Because it's wrong!

Wouldn't it be a much better idea simply to improve your education system? Then, the invitation Steelish has quoted to me with such pride would once more have meaning, rather than sounding as hollow as the Statue they appear on. Just try getting a Green Card and you'll see why so many give up and cross the border illegally.