California Is Wrong On Immigration
Mar 7, 2018 Immigration, Law Enforcement
And that state might find out how wrong very soon.
The Trump Administration is suing California claiming the state interfered with immigration enforcement. It is about time a sanctuary state has been taken to court and if things go well we will see a change in sanctuary policies because no court can reasonably uphold this kind of nonsense.
First things first. The Governor, Jerry Brown and his Attorney General, Xavier Becerra are claiming that the federal government has no right here and that the Tenth Amendment is involved and as such they have a right to do as they wish. They are mistaken, of course. The Tenth Amendment only applies to things the Constitution does not delegate to the federal government or prohibit from the states.
[note]The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. US Constitution[/note]
Immigration is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution but the US is granted the power over immigration in Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 10 (Power… To define and punish … offenses against the Law of Nations). There is an excellent article outlining this here. It is important to note that the state of Arizona passed its own immigration reform laws during the Obama regime and those laws nearly mirrored the federal laws. The Court struck those laws down (they were challenged by the Obama regime) because the federal government has supremacy in immigration law (that is the ruling).
Why would Arizona have these laws if they are the same as the feds? Because the federal government was not enforcing the law. The state passed the laws so it could protect itself from the harm federal inaction caused. The Court shot it down. Obama wanted it shot down so that illegals would be able to stay here. This was all swell with liberals because it gave them what they wanted.
Now the feds are challenging California because its laws are opposite federal law and they are preventing the federal government from doing its job. The airhead politicos in CA think they have the right to do this. Funny thing is CA is never concerned with any other state’s right to do things. CA is opposed to states that ban abortion or same sex marriage and will speak out against them. If CA believes it has the right to ignore federal law why can’t other states do so as well?
[note]As an aside, marriage of any kind and abortion are not in any part of the Constitution and would therefore actually be a state’s rights issue.[/note]
The state of California is on shaky ground here BUT it could very well win the suit. Look at how many activist judges have ruled improperly on many issues that have been challenged since Trump became president. These judges base their rulings on their political views and ignore the Constitution for fear of not being invited to the next big liberal cocktail party. Hell, I would not be surprised if the same court that ruled against Arizona ruled in favor of California. This is how out of control the judiciary is.
I think this will eventually make it to the Supreme Court and if those cowards don’t punt the ruling should go in favor of the federal government and against CA. Imagine if CA loses. The cities and states that are sanctuary will start to fall once swept up in the domino effect.
For a very long time liberal policies on immigration have been pushed while the rule of law ignored. Donald Trump is finally enforcing the laws and the liberals do not like it. It is about time we started fighting back against this insanity.
If there is justice in the world we will all see Governor Brown and his AG shown for the fools they are.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: becerra, brown, california, doj, Immigration, lies, sanctuary
Hillary Agrees With Trump
Aug 23, 2016 2016 Election, Immigration
She might be saying different things NOW but Hillary gave a speech in 2006 at the Council on Foreign Relations and she was saying a lot of the things trump has said. You know, Mexico is a problem, Mexican government encouraging people to come illegally, need a barrier (a wall is a barrier), secure the border, and those kinds of things.
You know, the things she is NOW attacking Trump for saying.
She changes her positions all the time. Perhaps it is more accurate to say she says whatever she thinks people want to hear in order to get their votes.
She is Satan. And she appears ill.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: 2006 speech, build a wall, Hillary, illegal aliens, lies
No Good Deed
Mar 20, 2016 Immigration, Political
A liber do-gooder found out the hard way that no good deed goes unpunished.
Some woman went to help and advocate for refugees because, you know, the racists hate them and do not want to help them. They are all angels and should be met with open arms (and open borders) so they can receive taxpayer handouts and live the life they deserve.
She showed up to help those little angels and they robbed her blind. The darlings took all her belongings from her car and anything she was carrying. It was all recorded and the video at the linked site shows her scrambling around demanding her phone and belongings be returned to her.
Refugees have been let into European nations by the tens of thousands and they have returned the generosity by assaulting and raping women, robbing people and causing civil unrest. They have complained about the freebies they are getting, the food they are served and the places they are GIVEN to live.
I guess this liberal found out the hard way that these folks are not fit to be in civilized nations and that they have no respect for people or property.
At least she was not raped or murdered.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: good deed, liberalism, moron, punishment, refugees, thieves
Pope Francis; Tear Down Those Walls
Feb 18, 2016 2016 Election, Immigration
Pope Francis, a man whose actions call his devotion into question, has entered the US political fray by attacking Donald Trump. The Pope was in Mexico and was asked about Trump’s positions regarding immigration and particularly his stance on building a wall. The Pope commented that we should be building bridges, not walls, and that anyone who would build such a wall is not a true Christian.
I am sure the Pope is aware that Christians read the Old Testament and follow its doctrine even though it was the Jews involved as Christians were not yet around. In the Old Testament there is some mention, I am sure the Pope can have a Bishop look it up, of at least one walled city.
In fact, if the Pope looks out his bedroom window he can see the very same thing.
You see Vatican City, which is its own small sovereign state, is surrounded by very high walls making it nearly impossible to get in. The Vatican has millions of people who enter it as tourists to visit the place but only about 800 people there are CITIZENS and the rules to gain citizenship are very strict.
Not just any Tom, Dick, or Harry can enter the Vatican and request citizenship. No one can scale the wall (thus entering illegally) and expect to stay and reap the benefits that those who come to America illegally get.
Pope Francis, you need to tear down those walls lest people take you at your word and claim you are not a Christian because you have walls surrounding you.
Why are there walls surrounding Vatican City in the first place? What’s that you say? For safety. Oh, I get it. You want to be able to control who enters YOUR sovereign little slice of the planet.
Well we want the same thing and we don’t need a socialist Pope prancing around telling us we should be doing otherwise.
So either tear down the walls and build a few bridges or sit down and shut up.
As an aside, if you tear down the walls ship the bricks over here. We could use them to lower the cost of our wall.
References:
Washington Times (A lot of pop ups and auto running video)
The American Mirror (great pictures of the WALLED CITY)
The New York Times
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: huge wall, Immigration, politics, pope francis, socialism, vatican city
Obama And Selective Law Enforcement
Dec 1, 2015 Commentary, Immigration, Political, Terrorism
Barack Obama is hell bent on bringing hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees to the United States. Republicans are not keen on the idea and Republican governors have stated they will not accept the refugees. Obama, in turn, claimed that these Republicans were afraid of women and children. He further stated that states do not have the legal authority to refuse refugees and those that do refuse will be subject to enforcement action.
[note]I have seen the lines of refugees and most are NOT women and children. Most of them appear to be young men in good shape. They appear to be in good enough shape to stay home and fight the battle. In any event, as Obama told us about fearing women and children a woman suicide bomber blew herself up and the internet displayed pictures of children holding up severed heads. Then again, this is the same Obama who said ISIS was contained a few hours before it terrorized Paris.[/note]
Obama means (at least this is what I gather) enforcement action with regard to the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). It seems that this office provides money to states that take in refugees. That should be no surprise since the federal government confiscates our money and then uses it to coerce states to do what big government wants it to do. Unfortunately too many states are eager to get the money so they play along.
Obama also made it clear that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race and national origin with regard to federal financial assistance (according to the linked article).
A few things here. Muslim and Islam are not races so that is a nonstarter. As far as national origin that might apply but these folks are not citizens and are not entitled to most federal programs. The ORR evidently has program money for these things and this is the money I think they are threatening to withhold.
I like the way ORR discusses the money as if it is theirs to give. It came from THE PEOPLE and it belongs to the people. Regardless, states are free to reject anyone they do not want and if that means the federal government cuts off money then so be it. The people already on those programs will suffer. Let’s face it, the everyday Joe citizen is not getting that money. The people getting it will stop getting it. Good. Perhaps it is time they earned money on their own and stopped getting it from the rest of us. Perhaps it is time for those states to refuse to collect money and send it to the feds. Just collect it and put it in escrow until the feds change the way things are done or better yet, spend it on the programs themselves and cut the feds out altogether.
[note]Here is an idea. Every person who thinks the Syrian refugees should come here MUST take a family in and support them. They must provide all their support including health care, food, and education, all of it. If it is such a worthy cause they should step up and help. After all, that is what they want all of us to do with our tax dollars. So make them do it.[/note]
This is a little more sinister than it appears. Notice how Obama is telling these Governors that they have no legal right to refuse refugees. He is citing the law (or his interpretation of it) and he is putting his foot down. All well and good because we want an Executive that follows the law.
But, when was the last time you heard Obama call out Governors (or other leaders like mayors) who allow sanctuary cities? It is against the law to have them. Their existence is a violation of our immigration laws and those involved are aiding criminals who are here illegally. Did anyone ever hear Obama tell these politicians they could not have sanctuary cities and if they did they would lose federal funding?
NO!
The reason is that law is one Obama likes. He selectively follows the laws. The ones he ;likes he enforces and the ones he does not like he does not enforce. Remember, this guy has a pen and a phone and he will bypass Congress to get things his way. He exceeds his authority to get what he wants (and Congress does not have the testicular fortitude to stop him).
It is bad that our petulant leader disobeys laws and selectively enforces them. It is equally as bad that he cares not about our safety and is trying to force states to take in potentially dangerous people.
If these people come here it will only be a matter of time before they plan and conduct a coordinated attack.
[note]They are not all bad Big Dog. Estimates say only 10% of them are radicalized. OK, how about I put 10 M&Ms in a bowl. Nine of them are regular candy and one is a poison that will kill you instantly. Will you select one to eat? Only 10% is dangerous…[/note]
If it happens after Obama leaves office his successor will get the blame. Unless of course his successor is a Democrat in which case the left will blame George W. Bush.
When (not if, but when) the attacks occur Obama should be held accountable as should anyone who worked to bring the terror here.
When that happens all hell will break loose and all the money the ORR has will not stop the administration of justice…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: Obama, refugees, state's rights, terrorists