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
Kagan Lied
Dec 24, 2011 Political
Associate Justice Elana Kagan lied to the Senate during her confirmation hearings and she should be impeached for this. Her lie was about her involvement in Obamacare prior to her selection to serve on the Supreme Court. Kagan lied about her involvement and recently released documents show that she was involved in the legal issues and that the DOJ tried cover this up by asseeting that she had been walled off from the issue. Many of the documents have been redacted so there is no telling what deeper involvement she had. The Senate should request the unredacted documents and dig as deep into this as it can.
Doug Ross does a great job detailing the documents, Kagan’s response to written questions about her involvement in Obamacare and the DOJ decpetion of “walling” her off.
Ross details how Kagan was asked (in writing) during the confirmation process about her involvement in Obamacare including being asked if she offered her opinions, views or comments (and specifically about a Constitutional challenge of the process of deem and pass). Kagan denied that she had done any of these things but the documents show otherwise. One such occurrence of her involvement took place thirteen days before she sat in front of the Senate judiciary Committee for her confirmation hearings.
Kagan lied, period. Not only did she lie but the DOJ tried to cover up her involvement. This folks, is illegal and she needs to be impeached (and heads at the DOJ need to roll).
Before she is impeached she needs to recuse herself from any debate regarding Obamacare IAW 28 USC 455.
This gang of criminals needs to be put in its place, and soon.
First she recuses, then she is impeached.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: confirmation, doj, doug ross. mark levin, elena kagan, impeach, lies, obamacare, recuse
Maybe We Should Just Riot
Jul 10, 2010 Commentary
A transit police officer in California shot and killed a man in 2009 and his trial has just concluded. Officer Johannes Mehserle was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter. He claims that he had his Tazer out and put it back and drew the wrong weapon. I don’t know if I would buy that but don’t know all that is involved. Suffice it to say that the jury believed it and he has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
The biggest problem in all of this is that the officer is white and the victim was black. Instantly there had to be some racial motivation and justice had to be served.
Well it was. In our system of justice the jury decides and this jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter and not murder (as the family wanted).
That did not sit well so what did the minority community in Oakland do? The same thing minority communities in California do every time they do not like a verdict, they rioted. The police and every person in town knew this was going to happen. The judge delayed the reading of the verdict to allow people to leave work and go home. Businesses were sending employees home early so they would not get caught in the rioting.
Why do we tolerate this kind of behavior?
The people who did not like the verdict lost all credibility. I do not want to hear how they feel or how upset they are or anything else. The community lost any sympathy I might have had when it decided to act like animals rather than functioning members of society.
And what happens when these folks riot? The US Department of Justice launches its own investigation into the matter. There was a trial and the guy was found guilty so why does the DOJ need to show up? They need to make sure the black community gets attention after the temper tantrum. They did it after the trial of the officers who beat Rodney King which, by the way, resulted in a riot.
Seems to be a pattern here. Throw a tantrum and get what you want. But why should people be allowed to riot and do damage to the property of others?
Did anyone see riots when OJ Simpson was found “not guilty” in what was a blatant example of payback for perceived crimes against blacks in the past? Did the DOJ show up and launch its own investigation into the Simpson murders?
No, we accepted the verdict and moved on with life.
But maybe we need to shift gears. Perhaps we need to start rioting when we do not get what we want. If the courts overturn Arizona’s law maybe we all need to riot, smash windows in Hispanic owned businesses and turn cars over in the streets. We could do this all across the country to get the point across. I would not expect the DOJ to intervene on our behalf as it is more likely it would come after us because it is headed by that racist Eric Holder.
I am not much for the rioting and violent demonstrations but it seems that this is the way to get some attention.
Besides, the liberal progressives in this country blame all violence on the peaceful members of society who conform to the rules. Pelosi still thinks TEA Party rhetoric will lead to violence.
The threats of riots and violence is a method of group intimidation and it is used effectively by minority communities to get what they want or to express dissatisfaction. Black communities riot over court cases where white cops shoot black suspects or when a black guy is convicted of killing a cop because they get attention. They feel oppressed and want attention so they throw tantrums like children.
The same is true in the Hispanic community. Pass a law they do not like, threaten to build a wall, raid workplaces or do anything else that impedes their lawbreaking and they gather in huge groups and protest.
And they get attention when they do this.
Perhaps we should consider their tactics.
I would like to have a “riot” on November 2nd this year where we all storm the polling places and vote everyone out of office. We need to show our strength in a non violent manner.
We can save the violence or when it is needed.
Like when confronted by New Black Panther Party members carrying nightsticks. If you see them this year beat them to death because the racist AG will not prosecute them for breaking the law.
To all you animals in Oakland, shame on you. Maybe an attitude like yours is what caused the shooting in the first place.
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]