Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Immigration, and it's judicial review!

Today, the American citizenry have been dealt a blow to their constitutional rights protect and defend their sovereignty. This has been done by federal judge, Susan Bolton. In hearing the case for a temporary stay while case is being heard, she set a hold upon most of the Arizona Law dealing with immigration.

The state legislation has been overplayed by the liberal media, calling it a crackdown. It is however not a crackdown but that of an affirmation of the federal immigration law. Try to tell this to the elitists in OUR government.

Arizona's sovereignty has in effect been dissolved. While the state legislation is clear in its intent enforce federal laws, the powers that be want no part of any subversive attempt to tread upon their usurped authority. It should be brought to light, the question of whether any of the opposition to the state legislation even attempted to read the content of such legislation.

Already embattled Gov. Jan Brewer vows the state will most likely appeal the judge's ruling. The two sides of the situation are drawing down fairly square with party-line.

Provisions not taking effect are summarily those requiring officers to check the immigration status when enforcing the violations in other laws, requiring immigrants to carry papers at all times, and the making it illegal undocumented workers soliciting employment. To the point, no arrests on immigration status.

Not being known for my political correctness I have to ask, “If this is summarily correct as by the courts then shouldn't the federal law be placed as among the court's ruling?”

The court's decision stated reasoning as for the determination of immigrant status of individuals held for criminal acts will over-burden the federal immigration system. In review, the court has said it would violate the civil rights of those in custody for criminal activity, in the checking of their status.

The legislation is not necessarily repealed, yet most likely will not stand to the stress of the liberal agenda. What is left of the law will go into effect on Thursday.

As if the state (AZ) has not had enough pressure to repeal the law, they have been inundated with boycotts, and threats thereof. All the while they have set off a trend of other such legislation by state and local governments from across the nation. Not to mention, the legislation has brought about a supposed mass exodus of undocumented immigrants.

Be assured that many of the protesters and and human rights groups will be mounting protests, and attempts to thwart such officiating of local laws. The opposition would have used such blockades as to block federal offices dealing with immigration, from being utilized thus hindering and violating the civil rights of those they have avowed to defend. How is this going to help these undocumented immigrants, when the protesters are impeding the the quick status check?

As for international opposition, I find their intervention in OUR domestic policies an atrocity. They have their own problems to deal with. So a word to these, “...stay out of OUR affairs!”

In reality, the criminals (those on expired visas and undocumented immigrants) are the only ones worried about the legislation. What about the rights of the taxpaying citizen? What about the rights of the legal (documented) immigrants?

The arguments of the legislation dealing with racial profiling, would only revert back to federal law. If the feds don't want to enforce their own legislation, then perhaps they should repeal it. A major shift in policy is sure to come. For the liberal agenda will not allow for the sustaining of constitutional rights for the citizen, and those that choose to follow procedure in becoming documented immigrants.

Seemingly, the federal government is fearing of the several states' guarantee of sovereignty by utilizing the Tenth Amendment. This does not allude to the states' forming legislation over-riding the federal, but assisting in the enforcement of such acts. That is what sovereignty is all about.

The ruling by the U. S. District judge has unleashed a reasoning to watch for the usurpation by the lower courts of OUR sovereign rights, thus guaranteed by the Constitution. This is why recent appointments by the current and predecessor presidents having stacked the courts to a liberal, left-leaning, policy shifting court.

The court's injunction was nothing more than a play of left-leaning agenda. Nothing in the judicial review follow along with proper reasoning of the ruling.

One Man's Opinion! That is all it is. We don't have to agree, and we don't have to disagree. All that matters is the redress of grievance and the non-violent call of responsibility.
Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment