In California, immigration bill designed as the "anti-Arizona".

[GojiMet86]

is it my fault that their countries are like that? maybe we should put one of our dictators in charge there, or maybe, they should fight to change their country, like our forefathers put their lives on the line ti get away from the tyranny of great britain

 

Joe

 

 

And they did it illegally, according to Britain's laws.

 

Oh, and these illegals work there asses off for a lot less money, so it's not like they don't deserve being here.

[Phantom909]

And they did it illegally, according to Britain's laws.

 

Oh, and these illegals work there asses off for a lot less money, so it's not like they don't deserve being here.

 

 

yes they did, but only after years of tyranny. thet laid out the reasons in the declaration of independence:

 

 

 

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

 

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

 

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

 

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

 

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

 

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

 

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

 

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

 

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

 

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

 

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

 

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.

 

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

 

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

 

For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

 

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

 

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

 

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:

 

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences

 

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:

 

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

 

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

 

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

 

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

 

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

 

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

 

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

they were all legitimate reasons. so why dont these illegals fight against the tyranny that they are facing at home, instead of coming here, and overburdening our system

 

joe

[GojiMet86]

But the thing is, you can change laws. I understand the Declaration of Independence. But I don't understand stand why illegals can't just be legalized.

 

And frankly, they've fought tyranny, and guess what? Latin America is democratic (although Castro and Chavez don't want it that way).

[Phantom909]

But the thing is, you can change laws. I understand the Declaration of Independence. But I don't understand stand why illegals can't just be legalized.

 

And frankly, they've fought tyranny, and guess what? Latin America is democratic (although Castro and Chavez don't want it that way).

 

 

because criminals should not be rewarded, what dont you understand about that?

 

joe

[GojiMet86]

because criminals should not be rewarded, what dont you understand about that?

 

joe

 

 

Laws can be repealed, can't you understand that?

 

If there was a law that stated that black people weren't allowed to sit on the same section of a bus with white people, that they couldn't marry white people, or that they couldn't vote, and if they tried to break those laws, then it's a crime, because it's criminal behavior, right?

[Phantom909]

Laws can be repealed, can't you understand that?

 

If there was a law that stated that black people weren't allowed to sit on the same section of a bus with white people, that they couldn't marry white people, or that they couldn't vote, and if they tried to break those laws, then it's a crime, because it's criminal behavior, right?

 

 

yes they can, but what you are not getting is that those segregated laws were repealed for AMERICAN CITIZENS. Illegals are NOT American Citizens, they have come here taking advantage of us, they have NO Constitutional rights, therefore we dont bend over backwards to reward their criminality.

 

Joe

[GojiMet86]

yes they can, but what you are not getting is that those segregated laws were repealed for AMERICAN CITIZENS. Illegals are NOT American Citizens, they have come here taking advantage of us, they have NO Constitutional rights, therefore we dont bend over backwards to reward their criminality.

 

Joe

 

 

By your reasoning, blacks shouldn't have been rewarded for their "criminality", and slaves weren't made citizens until the 14th Amendment, meaning that they were making you bend and giving them "unjustified rewards:.

[Grand Concourse]

why reward them and put them ahead of people trying to come here the LEGAL way? Is that fair to them? IMO Obama spit in all their faces with his refusal to enforce the laws.

 

Joe

 

He certainly didn't help his case by putting Napolitano as head of Homeland security and being opposed to Jan Brewer essentially cleaning up the mess left behind by Napalitano. What made it sad was how she did the swearing in of the recent group of citizens about 'upholding the constitution' or something to that degree.

[Phantom909]

By your reasoning, blacks shouldn't have been rewarded for their "criminality", and slaves weren't made citizens until the 14th Amendment, meaning that they were making you bend and giving them "unjustified rewards:.

 

 

wtf are you talking about, the 14th ammendment has nothing to do with this discussion. blacks were bought here against their will as slaves, we fought a war that cost 618,000 lives to abolish slavery. they had no country to go home to. this was there home, the 14th ammendment gave them citizenship.

 

what i was talking about were the segregation laws that were on the books some 50 years ago, they were repealed because they hurt American Citizens who paid taxes, tried as much as they could to assimilate, it took too long to do it, but it finally got done.

 

So why should we repeal laws for people who are NOT American Citizens, who do not pay taxes, who do not assimilate into American culture. They dont deserve it, they have a country to go home to, so time to send em packing

joe.

[GojiMet86]

wtf are you talking about, the 14th ammendment has nothing to do with this discussion. blacks were bought here against their will as slaves, we fought a war that cost 618,000 lives to abolish slavery. they had no country to go home to. this was there home, the 14th ammendment gave them citizenship.

 

what i was talking about were the segregation laws that were on the books some 50 years ago, they were repealed because they hurt American Citizens who paid taxes, tried as much as they could to assimilate, it took too long to do it, but it finally got done.

 

So why should we repeal laws for people who are NOT American Citizens, who do not pay taxes, who do not assimilate into American culture. They dont deserve it, they have a country to go home to, so time to send em packing

joe.

 

 

But that's the point. They weren't citizens before, and after a law passed (14th Amendment) they were. It does have to do something with this discussion because it shows that a group of people can be legalized. And when they are legalized, they can pay taxes AS law-abiding citizens.

 

And a lot of illegals do pay taxes. You'd be surprised. But you probably won't believe me.

[IntExp]

 

 

and why not? criminals are criminals period.

 

Joe

 

 

Yes, those who crossed the border illegally are criminals. Yes, they frankly broke the law getting here. But why did the people who chose that path do it? They did it out of sheer necessity. Most come here to work, not to destroy this country. Most come here to contribute, not to waste from it. I believe we should offer a path of legalization for people who came here illegally. Of course, not those who have a criminal background, or have been convicted of serious crimes. Yes, there are people who come here with malicious intent. But you have to understand, not all of them are like that. Not all try to come here to deal drugs, or fuel a rise in gangs. Its those people that USCIS should be after. Those that do serious stuff, like gang activity, for example. But it's not all immigrants. My parents, for example, have paid (and continue to do so) taxes ever since they came to this country and began working. All of it (the IRS doesn't care about your status, all they care about is getting their taxes). They have both learned English, and proudly love this country, and celebrate the 4th of July as if they were Americans. They seethe when they see those who have turned to gangs, or those who are taking advantage of the system, because they're the ones who damage the rep of immigrants everywhere. You want to stop immigration? Fine. First, go after the ones who hire them, not the workers themselves. They're the ones who bring us here, whether is mowing lawns, landscaping, picking your fruits and veggies, in construction, etc - even though offer low wages, by American standards. But we take it anyway, because the shitty wages we earn doing that here are better then the even shitter wages we would earn in our native countries. Deport those who actually commit serious crimes, not those who actually contribute to society. Make them learn English. Make them pay their taxes and penalty that should high, but not so high, so that people can actually try and fix their status.

 

 

 

yes they can, but what you are not getting is that those segregated laws were repealed for AMERICAN CITIZENS. Illegals are NOT American Citizens, they have come here taking advantage of us, they have NO Constitutional rights, therefore we dont bend over backwards to reward their criminality.

 

Joe

 

 

Well, since, that would be a violation of human rights. Since they aren't U.S. Citizens, they aren't entitled to their rights, eh?  So, let's say an immigrant has been accused of a crime- would he be given a fair and speedy trial, or would he be immediately assumed guilty, since as a non-citizen, he has no right to a fari trial and be sent to prison with due process of the law? That would be a violation of what America stands for- liberty and justice for all. Or if somebody committed a crime against an immigrant- would that person be prosecuted under the law, would he be let free without any sort of trial, simply because the victim is an illegal immigrant, and as such, has nor right to bring up a claim because he is not a citizen, and thus, not entitled to his rights? Now, the 14th Amendment. Many people are arguing for the repeal of that amendment, because it promotes immigration by allowing for so-called 'anchor babies," and since anyone born here is entitled to U.S. Citizenship, they are also entitled to the benefits that come to it.  Well, first of all, the benefits are only for the child, not for the parent, and second of all, Why? You would be depriving a chance for the child to become a potential asset to this country, to allow that child to aspire for his dreams in the greatest country in the world. Look, I'm the son of illegal immigrants (my parents are currently in court trying to fix their status). I work hard in school (my grades show it), I read The New York Times, I'm deeply interested in law, politics, and history- and I was born here, thus I am a U.S. Citizen. What about the other kids who are just like me, or are similar to me, but yet wouldn't be citizens if the 14th Amendment is repealed? What would happen to them? Should they let their dreams die away? What about me? Would I get my citizenship taken away because I just happened to be the son of illegal immigrants? Let's see, has the U.S. Supreme Cout affirmed other rights for immigrants? I'm hearing they have. Let' see..

 

United States v. Wong Kim Ark

Truax v. Raich

Yick Wo v. Hopkins

Oyama v. California

Takahashi v. Fish & Game Commission

Graham v. Richardson

Plyler v. Doe

 

Wow. All those cases that affirmed the rights of immigrants, and are still in force today. Man, leaves you something to think, eh? And Plyler v. Doe explicitly states that....

 

The Fourteenth Amendment provides that "[n]o State shall. . . deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." (Emphasis added.) Appellants argue at the outset that undocumented aliens, because of their immigration status, are not "persons within the jurisdiction" of the State of Texas, and that they therefore have no right to the equal protection of Texas law. We reject this argument. Whatever his status under the immigration laws, an alien is surely a "person" in any ordinary sense of that term. Aliens, even aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful, have long been recognized as "persons" guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Indeed, we have clearly held that the Fifth Amendment protects aliens whose presence in this country is unlawful from invidious discrimination by the Federal Government...Neither our cases nor the logic of the Fourteenth Amendment supports that constricting construction of the phrase "within its jurisdiction." The Equal Protection Clause was intended to work nothing less than the abolition of all caste-based and invidious class-based legislation...Use of the phrase "within its jurisdiction" thus does not detract from, but rather confirms, the understanding that the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment extends to anyone, citizen or stranger, who is subject to the laws of a State, and reaches into every corner of a State's territory. That a person's initial entry into a State, or into the United States, was unlawful, and that he may for that reason be expelled, cannot negate the simple fact of his presence within the State's territorial perimeter. Given such presence, he is subject to the full range of obligations imposed by the State's civil and criminal laws. And until he leaves the jurisdiction — either voluntarily, or involuntarily in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States — he is entitled to the equal protection of the laws that a State may choose to establish.

 

 

In short, everyone, legal or illegal, have rights. And the Supreme Court has stated this numerous times.