It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Digital_Reality
I'm just confused as to why they are using all this energy to block attempts to secure the border instead of actually trying to pass a law to STOP the migration of drugs and illegals over the border.
They are literally making no attempt at solving the problem. Its almost like they want to allow the current situation to continue.
Originally posted by sex raptor
heck yes.. this racist law will be block a win for the people of this world..
we are all one
Originally posted by FiatLux
... Does the government understand, that by NOT enforcing the federal law, they can be held liable. It would be within the states rights to go after the Feds for not enforcing the law. ...
Look, you asked if you were wrong...and you were. Now it is up to you if you want to educate yourself or remain willfully ignorant.
If one is detained because of probable cause,and has no ID, one's status will need to be verified. That means all of us, citizens or not. If we are detained without probable cause, that is illegal on the part of law enforcement.
While detention requires only that police have reasonable suspicion that a person is involved in criminal activity, an arrest requires that the officer have probable cause to believe that the person has committed a crime. Although some states require police to inform the person of the intent to make the arrest and the cause for the arrest,[13] it is not always obvious when a detention becomes an arrest. After making an arrest, police may search a person, her belongings, and her immediate surroundings.
It is not clear whether a “stop and identify” law could compel giving one’s name after being arrested, although some states have laws that specifically require an arrested person to give her name and other biographical information,[16] and some state courts[17][18] have held that refusal to give one’s name constitutes obstructing a public officer. As a practical matter, an arrested person who refused to give her name would have little chance of obtaining a prompt release.
Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
I am not surprised by this ruling. It just confirms that all THREE branches of our government are corrupt, and could care less about the Constitution.
The illegals take to the streets every time someone threatens to crack down on illegal immigration. Maybe it IS time for the legal Americans that are SICK AND TIRED of the garbage being pushed by this government, to take to the streets, and WATER THE TREE OF LIBERTY.
We are sick and tired and are not going to take it anymore!
Originally posted by oniongrass
Originally posted by FiatLux
... Does the government understand, that by NOT enforcing the federal law, they can be held liable. It would be within the states rights to go after the Feds for not enforcing the law. ...
I think they cannot go after the Feds because of "sovereign immunity" or some such. They could secede and say the marriage is no longer working. Maybe that's the way we're going, I don't know.
Arizona is not in a very good position to secede because of water shortage. Unless they own all the rights to the Central Arizona Project (a big pipe running from the Colorado River, on the Arizona / California border, east to Phoenix and Tucson) including the rights to the water. In terms of power they are in pretty good shape; they have Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station.