tnshootist
New member
If there was a way to enforce the constitution as written concerning the office of President would be good enough for me.
Feds quietly dump hundreds of illegal immigrants in Tennessee
- Thread starter hm1996
- Start date
dogcatcher
Active member
Originally Posted By: tnshootistIf there was a way to enforce the constitution as written concerning the office of President would be good enough for me. Originally Posted By: tnshootistIf there was a way to enforce the constitution as written concerning the office of President would be good enough for me.
There is nothing in the Constitution about immigration, this cluster is courtesy of past and present Congress and past and present Presidents.
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#immigration
Quote:Immigration
The Constitution never uses the word immigration, so how is it that the rules for immigrants, and quotas for countries, are set by the federal government and not by the state governments? After all, as the 10th Amendment states, are the powers not delegated to the United States held by the states, or the people?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how, or even if, that immigrant can come into the country in the first place. Just because the Constitution lacks the word immigration does not mean that it lacks the concept of immigration.
There is also an argument that immigration is an implied power of any sovereign nation, and as such, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration because the United States is a sovereign nation. While it is true that the United States is a sovereign nation, and it may be true that all sovereign nations have some powers inherent in that status, it is not necessary to determine if immigration is such a power that does not even require constitutional mention, because the Naturalization Clause handles the power.
Thanks to Jason Potkanski for the idea, and Stephen Lush for some clarification.
There is nothing in the Constitution about immigration, this cluster is courtesy of past and present Congress and past and present Presidents.
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#immigration
Quote:Immigration
The Constitution never uses the word immigration, so how is it that the rules for immigrants, and quotas for countries, are set by the federal government and not by the state governments? After all, as the 10th Amendment states, are the powers not delegated to the United States held by the states, or the people?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how, or even if, that immigrant can come into the country in the first place. Just because the Constitution lacks the word immigration does not mean that it lacks the concept of immigration.
There is also an argument that immigration is an implied power of any sovereign nation, and as such, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration because the United States is a sovereign nation. While it is true that the United States is a sovereign nation, and it may be true that all sovereign nations have some powers inherent in that status, it is not necessary to determine if immigration is such a power that does not even require constitutional mention, because the Naturalization Clause handles the power.
Thanks to Jason Potkanski for the idea, and Stephen Lush for some clarification.
I too was ticked when I read this story the other day. Now I'm back on one of my zero tolerance kicks when it comes to dealing with "undocumented foreign nationals" that I may come across at work. The bad thing is after months of only a handful of them coming to court, and the ones that do getting a free attorney, free interpreter and no court cost, I always wind up going back to avoiding them. It's not worth my time to enforce any law against them, laws that citizens have enforced on them everyday. It honestly drives me crazy.
While eating breakfast at work the other day, I was running off at the mouth about this story. It was the day I and the other guys first heard it. This led to the usual venting session, I used a specific example of a guy I arrested 2 years ago. No paperwork, no license, no insurance, nice newer model car, a family that seemed to be well taken care of, a job as a heavy equipment operator and a couple of grand in his pocket. Roadside he spoke bueno English, in court he no habla. He also claimed (through is interpreter) to be unemployed and to have not understood why I stopped him or anything I'd told him. Anyway, guess who I stopped less than two hours after my rant. Yes that's right my amigo from two years ago. I know it's petty, but it made my day and was a heck of a kickoff to my no tolerance spree!
While eating breakfast at work the other day, I was running off at the mouth about this story. It was the day I and the other guys first heard it. This led to the usual venting session, I used a specific example of a guy I arrested 2 years ago. No paperwork, no license, no insurance, nice newer model car, a family that seemed to be well taken care of, a job as a heavy equipment operator and a couple of grand in his pocket. Roadside he spoke bueno English, in court he no habla. He also claimed (through is interpreter) to be unemployed and to have not understood why I stopped him or anything I'd told him. Anyway, guess who I stopped less than two hours after my rant. Yes that's right my amigo from two years ago. I know it's petty, but it made my day and was a heck of a kickoff to my no tolerance spree!
seeknulfind
New member
There is another side to all of this too - the kids. And by this I mean the real kids involved. They are shoved around like pawns on a chess board. And who is puffing up about these poor children? The liberal idiots. The fact is they are using these kids to further their own agenda. What is best for the kids? Lemmetellya...
Before I was a foster parent, my wife and I went on a short missions trip to Ukraine. Many people from our church adopted some of these kids. My own impression after the trip was, and I wrote the missions board about this, these children are better off in Ukraine. They know the language. They know the culture and they have their own country and identity. Who are we to presuppose that dragging them to this country will give them a better life? It is pure arrogance on our part.
These kids are the wealth of their countries. To yank them out by the roots and drop them here is the worst thing we can do. They need to stay where they are and build their own nation.
Andy
Before I was a foster parent, my wife and I went on a short missions trip to Ukraine. Many people from our church adopted some of these kids. My own impression after the trip was, and I wrote the missions board about this, these children are better off in Ukraine. They know the language. They know the culture and they have their own country and identity. Who are we to presuppose that dragging them to this country will give them a better life? It is pure arrogance on our part.
These kids are the wealth of their countries. To yank them out by the roots and drop them here is the worst thing we can do. They need to stay where they are and build their own nation.
Andy
tnshootist
New member
Originally Posted By: seeknulfindThere is another side to all of this too - the kids. And by this I mean the real kids involved. They are shoved around like pawns on a chess board. And who is puffing up about these poor children? The liberal idiots. The fact is they are using these kids to further their own agenda. What is best for the kids? Lemmetellya...
Before I was a foster parent, my wife and I went on a short missions trip to Ukraine. Many people from our church adopted some of these kids. My own impression after the trip was, and I wrote the missions board about this, these children are better off in Ukraine. They know the language. They know the culture and they have their own country and identity. Who are we to presuppose that dragging them to this country will give them a better life? It is pure arrogance on our part.
These kids are the wealth of their countries. To yank them out by the roots and drop them here is the worst thing we can do. They need to stay where they are and build their own nation.
Andy
That sounds like common sense and experience, with wisdom gained through first hand knowledge. Glad you posted.
Before I was a foster parent, my wife and I went on a short missions trip to Ukraine. Many people from our church adopted some of these kids. My own impression after the trip was, and I wrote the missions board about this, these children are better off in Ukraine. They know the language. They know the culture and they have their own country and identity. Who are we to presuppose that dragging them to this country will give them a better life? It is pure arrogance on our part.
These kids are the wealth of their countries. To yank them out by the roots and drop them here is the worst thing we can do. They need to stay where they are and build their own nation.
Andy
That sounds like common sense and experience, with wisdom gained through first hand knowledge. Glad you posted.
tnshootist
New member
Dogcatcher, you are right on your point of course. My point is meant to be that we have had immigration laws for many years and many have immigrated legally, and many have been deported or turned away. This president has chosen to say the law is not good enough for him so he again makes law himself, and orders law not to be followed that has been working at least to some extent, for many years. I think there is something in the Constitution about the powers, or limits of power of the branches of government. In fairness immigration policy, or lack thereof, is not exclusive to oboma, but he has willfully made the problem explode. He has no business " fundamentally changing America" on his own whims.
dogcatcher
Active member
Originally Posted By: tnshootistDogcatcher, you are right on your point of course. My point is meant to be that we have had immigration laws for many years and many have immigrated legally, and many have been deported or turned away. This president has chosen to say the law is not good enough for him so he again makes law himself, and orders law not to be followed that has been working at least to some extent, for many years. I think there is something in the Constitution about the powers, or limits of power of the branches of government. In fairness immigration policy, or lack thereof, is not exclusive to oboma, but he has willfully made the problem explode. He has no business " fundamentally changing America" on his own whims.
The difference between today and say 1955, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995 or any other year since I can remember is that this time it is children, not adults flooding the border. The border has been a free for all of these years, but now it is major problem. Both sides of the aisle have had a majority and have had time to fix it, neither side wants too fix it.
What I see as "funny" is Texas, New Mexico and California have suffered this for years, now that the children have flooded the system, they are getting shipped to other states. Finally the rest of the country is getting what we have had for the last 100 years. Maybe now the Congress will be forced to do something constructive instead of lip service.
The difference between today and say 1955, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995 or any other year since I can remember is that this time it is children, not adults flooding the border. The border has been a free for all of these years, but now it is major problem. Both sides of the aisle have had a majority and have had time to fix it, neither side wants too fix it.
What I see as "funny" is Texas, New Mexico and California have suffered this for years, now that the children have flooded the system, they are getting shipped to other states. Finally the rest of the country is getting what we have had for the last 100 years. Maybe now the Congress will be forced to do something constructive instead of lip service.
dogcatcher
Active member
Originally Posted By: tnshootistDogcatcher, you are right on your point of course. My point is meant to be that we have had immigration laws for many years and many have immigrated legally, and many have been deported or turned away. This president has chosen to say the law is not good enough for him so he again makes law himself, and orders law not to be followed that has been working at least to some extent, for many years. I think there is something in the Constitution about the powers, or limits of power of the branches of government. In fairness immigration policy, or lack thereof, is not exclusive to oboma, but he has willfully made the problem explode. He has no business " fundamentally changing America" on his own whims.
The difference between today and say 1955, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995 or any other year since I can remember is that this time it is children, not adults flooding the border. The border has been a free for all of these years, but now it is major problem. Both sides of the aisle have had a majority and have had time to fix it, neither side wants too fix it.
What I see as "funny" is Texas, New Mexico and California have suffered this for years, now that the children have flooded the system, they are getting shipped to other states. Finally the rest of the country is getting what we have had for the last 100 years. Maybe now the Congress will be forced to do something constructive instead of lip service.
The difference between today and say 1955, 1965, 1975, 1985, 1995 or any other year since I can remember is that this time it is children, not adults flooding the border. The border has been a free for all of these years, but now it is major problem. Both sides of the aisle have had a majority and have had time to fix it, neither side wants too fix it.
What I see as "funny" is Texas, New Mexico and California have suffered this for years, now that the children have flooded the system, they are getting shipped to other states. Finally the rest of the country is getting what we have had for the last 100 years. Maybe now the Congress will be forced to do something constructive instead of lip service.
Originally Posted By: seeknulfindInteresting. We used to provide foster care... mostly short term until we took one long term (she is still with us and a very sad, sad story by itself). There was, and probably still is, a huge shortage of foster homes. You know - places for kids ALREADY in the system needing homes. This shortage was nation-wide. Now all of a sudden this country is inundated with untold (transparently, apparently, but still untold) numbers of children needing homes. And don'tchaknowit there they are. Where were all these open arms for children in this country legally? Where are the open arms for the homeless children and adults who exist in this country legally? I saw someplace where there are enough empty houses in the US to shelter every homeless person in the US and then some. And, yet somehow, we not only open our doors to a swarm of people who first break our laws entering our country, but we treat them better than we treat our own. Meanwhile, the administration ignores any hint of duty to uphold the Constitution and enforce the law. How much longer can we tolerate our politicians?
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
aarrgggghhh what a total waste of money.. They should use that funding to lock it down..
Especially when they are talking about the Ebola outbreak going on.. Thankfully it's passed through bodily fluids.. But if you get this recient strand you have a 60% mortality rate. There is nothing they can do for you, other than Moraphine and you can take up to a few weeks to die..
This alone should be reason to get control of our borders.
Also, i saw the Feds are shipping the illegals to Hawaii, you can't tell me that you are expecting to deport them if you are flying them to Hawaii.. If they don't have ID how are they getting on a Plane? The rest of us get strip searched at the airport, but they hop right on. They also need to stick to the definition of kids.. If they are too young to pose for playboy, they are minors, the rest are adults and should be shipped right home. Do not pass go, and do not collect a free EBT card.
Especially when they are talking about the Ebola outbreak going on.. Thankfully it's passed through bodily fluids.. But if you get this recient strand you have a 60% mortality rate. There is nothing they can do for you, other than Moraphine and you can take up to a few weeks to die..
This alone should be reason to get control of our borders.
Also, i saw the Feds are shipping the illegals to Hawaii, you can't tell me that you are expecting to deport them if you are flying them to Hawaii.. If they don't have ID how are they getting on a Plane? The rest of us get strip searched at the airport, but they hop right on. They also need to stick to the definition of kids.. If they are too young to pose for playboy, they are minors, the rest are adults and should be shipped right home. Do not pass go, and do not collect a free EBT card.
dogcatcher
Active member
Originally Posted By: hm1996Originally Posted By: seeknulfindInteresting. We used to provide foster care... mostly short term until we took one long term (she is still with us and a very sad, sad story by itself). There was, and probably still is, a huge shortage of foster homes. You know - places for kids ALREADY in the system needing homes. This shortage was nation-wide. Now all of a sudden this country is inundated with untold (transparently, apparently, but still untold) numbers of children needing homes. And don'tchaknowit there they are. Where were all these open arms for children in this country legally? Where are the open arms for the homeless children and adults who exist in this country legally? I saw someplace where there are enough empty houses in the US to shelter every homeless person in the US and then some. And, yet somehow, we not only open our doors to a swarm of people who first break our laws entering our country, but we treat them better than we treat our own. Meanwhile, the administration ignores any hint of duty to uphold the Constitution and enforce the law. How much longer can we tolerate our politicians?
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
With a deal like that I may get back into cotton farming, get me about half a dozen for chopping and picking. We still have the old picker houses that we could house them in, free labor, cut down on diesel costs, machinery breakdowns, etc.. One for cooking and cleaning and the rest for field hands, this gives a new meaning to agricultural subsidies.
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
With a deal like that I may get back into cotton farming, get me about half a dozen for chopping and picking. We still have the old picker houses that we could house them in, free labor, cut down on diesel costs, machinery breakdowns, etc.. One for cooking and cleaning and the rest for field hands, this gives a new meaning to agricultural subsidies.
Originally Posted By: dogcatcherOriginally Posted By: hm1996Originally Posted By: seeknulfindInteresting. We used to provide foster care... mostly short term until we took one long term (she is still with us and a very sad, sad story by itself). There was, and probably still is, a huge shortage of foster homes. You know - places for kids ALREADY in the system needing homes. This shortage was nation-wide. Now all of a sudden this country is inundated with untold (transparently, apparently, but still untold) numbers of children needing homes. And don'tchaknowit there they are. Where were all these open arms for children in this country legally? Where are the open arms for the homeless children and adults who exist in this country legally? I saw someplace where there are enough empty houses in the US to shelter every homeless person in the US and then some. And, yet somehow, we not only open our doors to a swarm of people who first break our laws entering our country, but we treat them better than we treat our own. Meanwhile, the administration ignores any hint of duty to uphold the Constitution and enforce the law. How much longer can we tolerate our politicians?
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
With a deal like that I may get back into cotton farming, get me about half a dozen for chopping and picking. We still have the old picker houses that we could house them in, free labor, cut down on diesel costs, machinery breakdowns, etc.. One for cooking and cleaning and the rest for field hands, this gives a new meaning to agricultural subsidies.
That exact scenario came up in the radio discussion, DC.
Two different trains of thought emerged; one group feared that there might be misuse of the "children" by forcing them to perform work by their "keepers" while others thought that might not be such a bad idea to let them "earn their keep".
Lots of us old codgers remember the days when this was the normal means of getting cotton and other crops cultivated and harvested.
Regards,
hm
Heard a local talk show on the radio yesterday discussing this very issue.
It seems that the Catholic Charities are advertising for "foster" homes for illegal "children" up to the age of 23 or 24 YO and offering anyone willing to house these "children" $40 per day for up to 7 "children"!
Do the math! $40 x 30days = $1200 per month for one "child". $1200 X 12 months = $14,400 per year. $14,400 per year X 7 "children" = $100,800!
We all know where this money is coming from, I'm sure. I'm reasonably sure it will be tax free $$ as well, so I'm sure the vacuum will be filled. While the radio discussion only mentioned Catholic Charities, in the interest of full disclosure, I have read/heard mention in other media of Baptist (and I'm sure many other faith-based charities) involved in the care and feeding of the flood of illegals being imposed on our borders.
Obviously, this porous border must first be sealed before we can begin to hope for a solution to this huge drain on the treasury.
Regards,
hm
With a deal like that I may get back into cotton farming, get me about half a dozen for chopping and picking. We still have the old picker houses that we could house them in, free labor, cut down on diesel costs, machinery breakdowns, etc.. One for cooking and cleaning and the rest for field hands, this gives a new meaning to agricultural subsidies.
That exact scenario came up in the radio discussion, DC.
Lots of us old codgers remember the days when this was the normal means of getting cotton and other crops cultivated and harvested.
Regards,
hm
Longnkrnch
New member
I bet if they eere used for target practice they'd quit coming. You can call me cold, but I call it "conditioned"