Arizona counter sues Feds over immigration.

[pipelineaudio]

They want to "try to" do it themselves, but they want the federal government to pay for it.

Nope we offered to pay for it, and you all said we couldn't

 

[pipelineaudio]

I've often wondered why exactly they don't build their own fence or wall. Surely that's in the power of a state, to undertake a construction project? The only reason I can think of that they don't is that they wish the evil federal government to do it (and pay for it) for them.

Two reasons:

1: we aren't allowed to build a wall, because that was claimed to be usurping federal supremacy

2: Contrary to what the rest of you think, between the goldwater republicans and the bruce babbit democrats, arizona does not in any way want to have the environmental catastrophe, not to mention eyesore that a wall would cause.

For those not so blinded in their hatred and bigotry to keep from coming down here, have a look at the border area. For birders and herpetologists, it is one of the most amazing places in the world. Nobody wants to stick a wall on that

 

[Biscuit]

The biggest whine seems to be that the Feds have not finished building all the border fences yet.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/48600178/Arizona-immigration-counterclaim

but according to this, the Arizona portion was largely complete by 2009.
http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/newsroom/highlights/fence_map.ctt/fence_map.pdf

Oh they do make a fuss about that but there are several problems with their almighty fence solution

1. You can not fence the entire U.S. Mexico border. There are areas to rugged and un-watchable. It will merely be tunneled under, jumped over, or just dismantled.

2. Even were there are fences and border patrol they still come across

3. Not even 100's of miles of sonoran desert, a very hostile environment, is enough to stop them.

Nope, the current solutions of
1. Suing the fed
2. building fences
3. More border patrol
4. Citizen patrols

Will never help because the problem is an economic one. So long as there are no opportunities in Mexico and on south and there is a demand for cheap labor here they will keep coming.

ETA: seriously some of these immigrants travel the length of south america to reach the U.S. A couple more border patrol officers and some fencing is going to deter them? I doubt it.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Will never help because the problem is an economic one. So long as there are no opportunities in Mexico and on south and there is a demand for cheap labor here they will keep coming.

Statehood for Mexico?

 

[Biscuit]

Statehood for Mexico?

Lets start with a robust and effective guest worker program and go from there.

 

[fuelair]

@Pipelineaudio: You sure you're not uh... biased? Heavily?

No, not on the one you phrased it on, anyway. ESL/ESOL programs are largely crap material fed to teachers to make the systems look like they are doing something. It's fun to go to a meeting with a bright eyed happy esol'er who is telling you how easy it is to have kids count pennies, or pick flowers or rattle popcorn/m&ms in a pizza box to teach all including the ESOL kids.
UNTIL some mean nasty person (me, for example) picks a couple of CONCEPTS and asks how you teach those to a kid with no English. Makes them sad (and confused. ALWAYS, Never failed to stop one in his/her tracks).
ESOL as she is done is great for elementary school kids/groups where most things taught are largely concrete. By middle school- and definitely High School - that doesn't cut it. And learning a completely new concept with it's functions, applications (and where it doesn't apply but you would think it does) requires a vocabulary and understanding that the cute stuff does not touch. i.e. it demands the student learn English fast or that they have a teacher who reads and speaks their language. Good flipping luck.


PS. I'm the person in my High School who has been the "GoTo" for ESOL translation/glossary/accessory needs - ever since I took 20 minutes on the net to pull down the material they needed to work with a Haitian Creole only student in Math and Science and last year dug up same (mostly just vocab). I have no problem with ESOL students, I just think the program is pathetic and pretty useless. Now, if the feds would prepare or make textbook companies prepare textbooks with online translations of all their material in the same languages that the NY Regents does.................


(For anyone remembering my actual field and suspecting I am laying a load on you - or anyone who may need some of this - PM me and I'll send you the current sources I have. Unfortunately the major Haitian one died (and I do miss it) but.... Oh, given Canada, I am not sure why French is almost impossible to find - at least in Chemistry!)

 

[fuelair]

Trying to find references. Maybe it was just the threat of suits. It was a big deal for a bit. Ever since Flores -v- Arizona education officials have been extremely paranoid

Yep - Florida caved on ESOL ridiculously funny training for all teachers (it is Florida's fault though that it did not have to be all teachers but they rigged it so all of us had to go to classes - where for one, we had to learn a random group of things we might do accidentally that would seem deadly insults to an ESOL student. The general agreement (even of the instructor) was: You are in the US, US silly rules/procedures count here. If we visit your country we will make an effort to learn your silly rules/procedures (note I have pointed out these are all silly rules/procedures). I should also add that all the rules the ESOL person had I already knew (some since things I read/saw in elementary school in the 50s and I knew a lot she didn't (always felt it was good to know in either direction - be able to not insult good guys, be able to drive the bad ones crazy so you had time to get off the first shot while they were screaming at you.)

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Oh they do make a fuss about that but there are several problems with their almighty fence solution

1. You can not fence the entire U.S. Mexico border. There are areas to rugged and un-watchable. It will merely be tunneled under, jumped over, or just dismantled.

2. Even were there are fences and border patrol they still come across

3. Not even 100's of miles of sonoran desert, a very hostile environment, is enough to stop them.

And of course:

4. It's not Arizona's decision to make. (I realize this is a different category of problem to the ones you're listing which are about the problems of a fence regardless of who decides to do it.)

 

[WildCat]

Will never help because the problem is an economic one. So long as there are no opportunities in Mexico and on south and there is a demand for cheap labor here they will keep coming.

Lets start with a robust and effective guest worker program and go from there.

If lowering costs for businesses is the goal why stop at maximizing poverty? Why not get rid of safety regulation also? We may as well scrap all environmental laws while we're at it, a Dickensonian world of impoverished workers just wouldn't look right with clean air and water.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Just a reminder of what you wall nuts would be killing if you got your way

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

*sigh*

You know that was sarcastic, right?

 

[Piggy]

How so? The feds can not enforce state laws and the state can not enforce federal laws.

The state cannot enforce federal laws, but they certainly can turn people over to federal jurisdiction when they discover that federal laws have been violated.

ETA: If that were not the case, Loughner would not now be in federal custody.

 

[Piggy]

I think we should sue the federal government for failing to protect us from the invasion of zebra mussels.

If I'm not mistaken, this has happened. I believe it also happened in the case of carp, and the ruling went against the states.

 

[Piggy]

That's the thing that steams me most. People routinely say that the federal government isn't enforcing their laws, when that's simply a false statement of fact.

Actually, it's a true statement of fact. The existing laws are not being enforced.

However, this does not necessarily mean that they are intentionally being unenforced. It may be that the laws are simply unenforceable in real terms, given the current facts on the ground -- level of illegal immigration, federal funding, complicity within the USA, etc.

 

[Piggy]

But again, the claim that the states have the right to enforce immigration laws because the fed doesn't enforce is preposterous.

But the Arizona law in question, as I understand it, does not attempt to enforce federal law. It simply requires state and local authorities to determine whether federal law has been violated, and if so, to turn the violators over to federal jurisdiction.

Which should be non-controversial, except for the fact that there are so many violators of this particular federal law that turning over all of the discovered violators would overwhelm the system.

ETA: To say that state law enforcement is prohibited from attempting to determine if federal law has been violated in their state is patently ridiculous.

 

[drkitten]

The state cannot enforce federal laws, but they certainly can turn people over to federal jurisdiction when they discover that federal laws have been violated.

My understanding is that they cannot; the fed has to accept jurisdiction and custody. If the fed says "sorry, we don't want him," then the state has to either hold him (at its own expense) or release him.

And my understanding is that that's one of the points at issue in the AZ lawsuit; the fed is refusing to accept custody of various prisoners who are in violation of federal law, which is costing AZ real money.

 

[casebro]

So where do the feds draw the line at criminals to deport? I guess just being here illegally doesn't count as being a criminal. Or welfare fraud either, there seems to be no enforcement there either. Nor will a pregnant wet back delivering a baby at the hospital get her deported.

Legal immigrants need to be sponsored by a citizen, and not be on the welfare roles or guess what- out they go! Shouldn't illegals be held to the same standards, at least when they turn up?

 

[Piggy]

My understanding is that they cannot; the fed has to accept jurisdiction and custody. If the fed says "sorry, we don't want him," then the state has to either hold him (at its own expense) or release him.

And my understanding is that that's one of the points at issue in the AZ lawsuit; the fed is refusing to accept custody of various prisoners who are in violation of federal law, which is costing AZ real money.

Yes, that's true, too. The feds do not have to accept custody. If they did, the states would be able to unload anybody and everybody by merely claiming, rightly or wrongly, that they belonged to DC.

But that does not change the fact that there is nothing unusual about state authorities determining that a federal law has been violated and remanding (or attempting to remand) the accused perpetrator to federal jurisdiction.

As far as I can tell, the Arizona law simply requires state authorities to check for federal violations, and if such violations are found, to take appropriate actions to transfer the alleged violators to the federal system.

And that does not constitute an attempt by the state to enforce federal law.

 

[drkitten]

So where do the feds draw the line at criminals to deport?

Well, being a criminal is typically a requirement, and generally misdimeanors won't make it, either.

I guess just being here illegally doesn't count as being a criminal.

Nope. Violation of immigration regulations is not a crime, any more than violation of OSHA regulations is. Similarly, "having a baby" isn't a crime eiher.

The deportation procedures are -- must be, according the constitution -- fairly rigorous, to protect the rights of the people involved. Implicitly, this makes them expensive and resource-intensive, and the government would, by policy, rather spend the resources tracking down real criminals.

So illegals who aren't actually criminals tend to get free passes.

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

The Obama administration has enforced anti-illegal immigration laws more often and more consistently than the Bush administration. Illegal immigration is trending downward. However, AZ is trying to make it seem otherwise. The facts simply do not support AZ's case here.

Arizona is not "trying to make it seem otherwise." Whether or not illegal immigration is trending downward is not the issue. Drug cartel violence is at record highs and increasingly knows no borders. That alone is rendering the problem of illegal immigration more acute. Even if there is a downward trend, this does not mean that levels are anywhere close to acceptable. This has been a problem for decades and is reaching a boiling point. There are areas in Arizona that are federal land and yet are basically controlled by drug cartels. I am not attempting to conflate two issues; they are directly related.

As has been made clear in this thread, one of the major issues is what to do with illegal alien criminals. So what if illegal immigration is trending downward when you have record numbers of illegal alien violators of federal law clogging the system, when the feds should be deporting them to Mexico and won't allow the state to do so?