No, State Governors Can’t Refuse To Accept Syrian Refugees

In the case of Louisiana Bobby Jindal has invoked something in their state constitution allowing him some kind of emergency powers under threat. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in any legal battles in regards to the states rights issue.

originally posted by: SergeantSmoke

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Fear mongering? It has been stated that 72% of the refugees are males of fighting age. Legitimate fears and concern for constituents is what is happening. The Feds first responsibility is to protect citizens of the US, and any conflict of interest should be trumped by citizen and national sovereignty.

It has been stated and it has been debunked. Seek and ye shall find.

Actually it hasn't been debunked. Those figures are those crossing the Mediterranean and the other figures of the lower estimates are from the total refugee population.

I think it was stated before that NORMALLY the husband of a family will go to seek work or safe housing for his family and they call for them when established. This is how it's been done for hundreds of years, especially among the poor.

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
In the case of Louisiana Bobby Jindal has invoked something in their state constitution allowing him some kind of emergency powers under threat. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in any legal battles in regards to the states rights issue.

While his immigrant family from India is fully protected. The man has a lot of strange views.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: SergeantSmoke

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Fear mongering? It has been stated that 72% of the refugees are males of fighting age. Legitimate fears and concern for constituents is what is happening. The Feds first responsibility is to protect citizens of the US, and any conflict of interest should be trumped by citizen and national sovereignty.

It has been stated and it has been debunked. Seek and ye shall find.

Actually it hasn't been debunked. Those figures are those crossing the Mediterranean and the other figures of the lower estimates are from the total refugee population.

I think it was stated before that NORMALLY the husband of a family will go to seek work or safe housing for his family and they call for them when established. This is how it's been done for hundreds of years, especially among the poor.

It's safer staying in war torn Syria than to migrate with your "protector/provider"?

originally posted by: SergeantSmoke

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Fear mongering? It has been stated that 72% of the refugees are males of fighting age. Legitimate fears and concern for constituents is what is happening. The Feds first responsibility is to protect citizens of the US, and any conflict of interest should be trumped by citizen and national sovereignty.

It has been stated and it has been debunked. Seek and ye shall find.

Actually it hasn't been debunked. Those figures are those crossing the Mediterranean and the other figures of the lower estimates are from the total registered refugee population.

Start a thread. The official counts I read yesterday (and I didn't bookmark to my chagrin) show it at slightly over 50% being women and children, and of that, I forget what percentage of men over a certain age. If I find it again, I'll post it.

ETA: Not all the refugees are muscly men: Stretching Facts on Syrian Refugees

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
As for the rest, take it to SCOTUS.

I'm sure that's the plan.

No doubt.

originally posted by: thesaneone
This makes me giggle some days we cry for state rights unless its something we don't agree with then it's states shouldn't have any say in the matter.

For once I agree with you.

I personally for helping refugees but only after very very very carefull vetting.

But end of the day I think the invidual states ought to be the ones to decide.
The governors , congressman and senators of these areas are meant to speak for the people of there constituencies and if the people say no then the government has a duty to listen even if o e may disgree.

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you want to fix the refugee crisis, just tell Obama to stop funding and arming ISIS.

Sadly, he hasn't been listening to me.

a reply to: crazyewok

SCOTUS says states' rights don't trump the Constitution in this case. Pick a side, I guess.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Where in the constitution does it say states must take in refugees?

a reply to: thesaneone

But, but, but.....................but........ er............but?
Wish I could give you 100 stars for that.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you want to fix the refugee crisis, just tell Obama to stop funding and arming ISIS.

Sadly, he hasn't been listening to me.

Obama wants the caliphate to occur (the destabilization of the middle east). WHY?

Must be a post 911 fear thing. I remember the influx of Lebanese back in the 70's. There were concerns from some. They have enriched our society and DAMN, great food.

originally posted by: thesaneone
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Where in the constitution does it say states must take in refugees?

Did you miss the OP?

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you want to fix the refugee crisis, just tell Obama to stop funding and arming ISIS.

Sadly, he hasn't been listening to me.

Obama wants the caliphate to occur (the destabilization of the middle east). WHY?

Because he's being forced to play the hegemony game. Why else?

Good question. Start a thread. This one's about the states' behavior about refugees.

More than**** 150,000**** Syrians already live in the United States, according to census figures, and refugees who have relatives in the country are likely to be resettled with or near them

Syrians made up about 2 percent of the 70,000 refugees admitted during the last fiscal year. The three largest refugee groups were from Myanmar, Iraq and Somalia.


The United States has also admitted far larger numbers in the past. In 1979, it provided sanctuary to 111,000 Vietnamese refugees, and in 1980, it added another 207,000. Around the same time, the country took in more than 120,000 Cuban refugees during the Mariel boatlift, including around 80,000 in one month

Obama has raised the number of Syrian refugees who will be offered legal status to at least 10,000 this fiscal year.
Obama has said the United States will accept five times as many Syrian refugees this year as the total
admitted over the last four years.

a reply to: madenusa
This lends more credence to the opportunism argument, I'd guess.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: crazyewok

SCOTUS says states' rights don't trump the Constitution in this case. Pick a side, I guess.

But it's OK for cities to declare themselves "sanctuary cities" and ignore the Constitution and the laws of the US, including immigration law?

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

originally posted by: M5xaz
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If you want to fix the refugee crisis, just tell Obama to stop funding and arming ISIS.

Sadly, he hasn't been listening to me.

Obama wants the caliphate to occur (the destabilization of the middle east). WHY?

Islamist in the White House.
Too obvious....

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Fear mongering? It has been stated that 72% of the refugees are males of fighting age. Legitimate fears and concern for constituents is what is happening. The Feds first responsibility is to protect citizens of the US, and any conflict of interest should be trumped by citizen and national sovereignty.

70% fighting males?

Well, use historical American methods: Induct them into the US Army, train them and they can be the 'boots on the ground' against ISIS.

Y'all did it with the Irish during the Civil War. There's precedence and maybe even legal means.