Illegal Immigration and the Constitution
A lawsuit has been brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and a group of Hispanic American activists against the city of Hazelton, Pennsylvania, over a recent ordinance aimed at stopping illegal immigrants from living and working in the city. The lawsuit claims that illegal immigration is within the bounds of federal, not state, jurisdiction, on top of the general argument that many such laws are already on the books throughout America and are simple unenforceable. The Hazelton provision allows the city to fine landlords for housing illegal immigrants and makes English the city's official language.
The ACLU certainly has a valid argument in saying that state and local governments do not have the authority to control the federal borders and deal with illegal immigrant (the INS, among other departments, takes care of that). However, the lack of enforcement on the border and the inability to come up with a solution by the federal government has forced state officials into a corner where they have to act in order to protect their perceived economic interests.
In my view, the ACLU will probably not win this argument given the prevailing trend towards conservatism in America and the fact that while English as the official language provisions may not be the best approach to dealing with illegal immigrants, the voter and the citizen in America always look for strong leaders in spite of their politics. Legally, the ACLU case is stronger because the federal government should be taking care of this but courts are not insulated and their is a trend toward state activism on issues like illegal immigration.
Published by Nicholas Katers
Nicholas Katers is a graduate of University of Wisconsin-Green Bay (BA, 2003) and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (MA, 2007) in History and currently a freelance writer. You can find his work in the In... View profile
- Illegal Immigration and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano Vs Congress, BushIllegal immigration is a hot-button issue, finally. Nowhere else is this more a problem than in Arizona, and Governor Janet Napolitano is fed up. She's pretty much on her knees now and begging Congress to stop pussyfo...
- Illegal Immigration and Possible Solutions Part 2The solution to a problem of this magnitude must be addressed with several different approaches. The main priority is to minimize the population growth caused by the influx of illegal immigrants into the United States.
- Illegal Immigration and What You Aren't Being Told!An opinion piece that discusses a facet of the immigration issue that has been deliberately ignored in the media. Rational thought and logic are used to look at the issue and to develop a sensible view.
- Tackling Illegal Immigration Epidemic in the United StatesWhat should we do about illegal immigration? It is really impossible to stop it fully, but how do we control it to a certain degree? Follow me on this article as I list three necessary steps to help control the influx...
The Positions of the Third Party Presidential Candidates Regarding Immig...Stats show that Third Party Candidates are getting more attention from the voters. Read their opinions on the issue of Immigration and Border Security and you will get quiet a...
- What Everyone Should Know About Illegal Immigration
- How Illegal Immigration Ended the Conservative Movement
- Illegal Immigrants and the English Language
- Stem Cell Research, Illegal Immigration, and the Definition of Marriage
- Illegal Immigration in the United States
- We Are a Nation of Immigrants and the Healthcare Plan of Barack Obama
- We Must Bring Back Free Immigration and Free Trade
15 Comments
Post a CommentThe 14th amendment assures you, the illegals will win with their anchor babies. The inepts in D.C. should have corrected this amendment 30 years ago. Our political inepts gave the country away.
Immigration is the states jurisdiction. The law that makes English the city's official language IS a violation of 1st amendment."abridging the freedom of speech"
Article 1 Section 10 of the US Constitution says, [PARAPHRASED]
"every state in the union, shall, without the Consent of Congress, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, or engage in War, when actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
Article II, section 3, of the US Constitution says, [PARAPHRASED] "The President, shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution says, [PARAPHRASED] "every state in the union, is responsible to every state in the union, for securing our union against invasion."
The 10th Amendment of the Constitution, says "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."
The 11th Amendment, "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of a
See
Criminal Resource Manual 1918 Arrest of Illegal Aliens by State and Local Officers
URL: http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01918.htm
Also local cops already have federal permission to enforce
federal immigration laws, under 287(g) without an MOU.
See US Codes http://www.gpoaccess.gov/uscode/
8USC1357 <<< Search this one
8USC1357(a) <<<< Read these
8USC1357(g)
8USC1357(g)(8)
8USC1357(g)(9)
8USC1357(g)(10)(a) <<<
8USC1357(g)(10)(b) <<<
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36485224/Appellants-Opening-Brief
http://www.scribd.com/doc/36493479/U-S-v-STATE-OF-ARIZONA-APPEAL-9th-CIRCUIT-Addendum-to-Appellants-Opening-Brief-Transport-Room
While the federal government may have original jurisdiction to enforce federal immigration laws, and declare war, the federal government does not have exclusive jurisdiction to enforce federal immigration laws. Under laws enacted by Congress, states have concurrent jurisdiction and are requested and encouraged to assist the enforcement of federal immigration laws. US States are encouraged to engage in war, if invaded.
See: Article 1 Section 10, Clause 3 and Article 4 Section 4.
Further to my last: Because the Constitution is a contract effectively between two parties, it does not confer ANY RIGHTS on anyone who is not a party to the contract unless specifically given. No specific rights are given to anyone who is not party to the contract, therefore no one who is not party to the contract has ANY rights by it. The concept that everyone in the world has rights under our Constitution, or even anyone who happens to be present within the USA, has "rights" according to the Constitution is absolutely FALSE.
The constitution is a CONTRACT between we the people (residing in the states in 1787), and made binding on all who are considered to be citizens in perpetuity. It was NOT written to be interpreted or changed in any way by lawyers. In fact there was a move, which strangely got lost, many years ago to prohibit lawyers from holding elected positions in federal government. There is no authority in the Constitution for federal control of immigration. (period) In fact the only influence that is implied for the Federal Government is the rejection of importation (immigration of an individual) by the States. The Federal Government has assumed control of immigration, not because of Constitutional authority, but by force and abdication. In any case, the executive department does not have a leg to stand on Constitutionally in suing Arizona. They may prevail only by deceit, byt not by Constitutional right.
yeah the aclu seems to do whatever will destroy the country it seems. those who support illegals are traitors to this country
The annual USA Green Card Lottery makes 55,000 green cards available every year to individuals worldwide who meet two basic eligibility requirements.
www.usadiversitylottery.com
If anyone has anymore references to the constitution please comment so that you can help the world decide. More or less immigration?