HeloDude Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 11 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said: https://www.pulj.org/the-roundtable/do-sanctuary-cities-violate-the-law Thanks for sharing an article written by a college kid over 5 years ago who only uses the term “undocumented immigrants”…yeah, no bias there. If we’re going to discuss US law, perhaps start using terms in US law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 minute ago, HeloDude said: Thanks for sharing an article written by a college kid over 5 years ago who only uses the term “undocumented immigrants”…yeah, no bias there. If we’re going to discuss US law, perhaps start using terms in US law. I’m sorry, I must’ve missed your peer reviewed academic argument supporting documentation? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/undocumented_immigrant Does Cornell Law’s definition suffice for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 4 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said: I’m sorry, I must’ve missed your peer reviewed academic argument supporting documentation? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/undocumented_immigrant Does Cornell Law’s definition suffice for you? Since when does Cornell have anything to do with the words used in US law? “Undocumented immigrant” isn’t found anywhere in US code. Even the link to shared goes back to citing US code which uses the term “alien”. From NPR (hardly a conservative outlet): “The word "alien" is used throughout U.S. immigration law. But the White House is seeking to replace it as part of a sweeping overhaul bill it sent to Congress.” https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988789487/immigration-agencies-ordered-not-to-use-term-illegal-alien-under-new-biden-polic Oh and the author of your earlier post is also against the Electoral College…he is such a supporter of the Constitution. https://www.pulj.org/the-roundtable/the-constitutionality-of-the-national-popular-vote-interstate-compact Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff_T Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 2 minutes ago, HeloDude said: The word "alien" is used throughout U.S. immigration law. But the White House is seeking to replace it as part of a sweeping overhaul bill it sent to Congress.” They need to replace "Alien" with "Butt Muncher". At least I could laugh everytime I read about this crap. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tac airlifter Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said: I’m sorry, I must’ve missed your peer reviewed academic argument supporting documentation? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/undocumented_immigrant Does Cornell Law’s definition suffice for you? Thank you for posting both articles. This gets at the heart of our nations inability to resolve our conflicts by discussion anymore. For those not clicking on his first link, it’s a Penn State law opinion piece that basically says ‘no, sanctuary city policies do not violate federal law because they only stop local governments from helping federal immigration authorities.’ The article ignores multiple incentives by sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants that entice them to break the law and ignores countervailing legal opinions that sanctuary cities are in fact, violating the law by aiding and abetting lawbreakers. That in itself is a crime. The article also ignores the crime of conspiracy between NGO’s directly assisting illegal immigrants and sanctuary cities who directly assist those NGOs. but whatever, I’m uninterested in a tit for tat on the articles or even the legal issue. I appreciate it for a broader reason: it illuminates a phenomenon that has poisoned domestic politics, namely, no matter how threatened and assaulted people feel a democratic lawyer will tell you “actually, as a legal expert, you have to just shut up and take it and you aren’t qualified to have a different opinion.” Don’t want your car destroyed when you accidentally drive upon a BLM protest? Too bad, you have to take it. Find yourself getting chased by a mob trying to bludgeon you? Can’t shoot them, sorry, you shouldn’t have been there. Democrats always have a legal justification for the injustice you must endure, and that makes conversation impossible because they just want us all to follow the law… which, of course is whatever they say it is. By their actions they have invited lawlessness into our national conversation, which works both ways. They don’t like it, but that’s too bad, prepare for more. Edited January 26 by tac airlifter 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 11 minutes ago, HeloDude said: Since when does Cornell have anything to do with the words used in US law? “Undocumented immigrant” isn’t found anywhere in US code. Even the link to shared goes back to citing US code which uses the term “alien”. From NPR (hardly a conservative outlet): “The word "alien" is used throughout U.S. immigration law. But the White House is seeking to replace it as part of a sweeping overhaul bill it sent to Congress.” https://www.npr.org/2021/04/19/988789487/immigration-agencies-ordered-not-to-use-term-illegal-alien-under-new-biden-polic Oh and the author of your earlier post is also against the Electoral College…he is such a supporter of the Constitution. https://www.pulj.org/the-roundtable/the-constitutionality-of-the-national-popular-vote-interstate-compact Since you're quibbing about it, let's clarify: 1. Alien - Terminology in Title 8 of U.S. Code to describe a person who is not a citizen or national of the United States. "Alien" is the term in statute; see noncitizen, foreign national. 2. Immigrant - Any person lawfully in the United States who is not a U.S. citizen, U.S. national, or person admitted under a nonimmigrant category as defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 101(a)(15). 3. Nonimmigrant - Any person in the United States not a U.S. citizen or U.S. national who is admitted on a temporary basis to the United States for a specific purpose under a nonimmigrant category as defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 101(a)(15). 4. Migrant - A person who leaves his/her country of origin to seek temporary or permanent residence in another country. https://www.dhs.gov/ohss/about-data/glossary Just because some college kid wrote a peer-reviewed research article on a topic you somehow interpret that as me agreeing and/or supporting everything he wrote about? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff_T Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 So they're wasting time by making legislation to change the name "Alien"? Why does it matter what we call them? Does that change anything? No. Just more bullshit from politicians. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 19 minutes ago, tac airlifter said: Thank you for posting both articles. This gets at the heart of our nations inability to resolve our conflicts by discussion anymore. For those not clicking on his first link, it’s a Penn State law opinion piece that basically says ‘no, sanctuary city policies do not violate federal law because they only stop local governments from helping federal immigration authorities.’ The article ignores multiple incentives by sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants that entice them to break the law and ignores countervailing legal opinions that sanctuary cities are in fact, violating the law by aiding and abetting lawbreakers. That in itself is a crime. The article also ignores the crime of conspiracy between NGO’s directly assisting illegal immigrants and sanctuary cities who directly assist those NGOs. but whatever, I’m uninterested in a tit for tat on the articles or even the legal issue. I appreciate it for a broader reason: it illuminates a phenomenon that has poisoned domestic politics, namely, no matter how threatened and assaulted people feel a democratic lawyer will tell you “actually, as a legal expert, you have to just shut up and take it and you aren’t qualified to have a different opinion.” Don’t want your car destroyed when you accidentally drive upon a BLM protest? Too bad, you have to take it. Find yourself getting chased by a mob trying to bludgeon you? Can’t shoot them, sorry, you shouldn’t have been there. Democrats always have a legal justification for the injustice you must endure, and that makes conversation impossible because they just want us all to follow the law… which, of course is whatever they say it is. By their actions they have invited lawlessness into our national conversation, which works both ways. They don’t like it, but that’s too bad, prepare for more. At the end of the day, attorneys give out educated guesses via arguments, but that doesn't mean they're right and they're going to win their argument. However, they're educated in the matter of opinion, they're the subject matter experts in the law. I've always wondered if an influx of attorneys invaded this forum and told you guys how to fly airplanes and see what responses they'd receive. I'm sure it'd be along the lines of "One of us has pilot wings and one of us doesn't, how about Carpe STFU?" However, I do agree with you. I live in the most conservative county in Colorado. It's clean, nice, and it's 20 miles away from the shit hole known as Denver that has been ruined by progressive "democratic socialists" who are currently trying to pass legislation to ban landlords from evicting a tenant for cause, even after their lease has expired as long as they're still paying their rent. The standard response I hear when migrants or homeless break into a business, or someone's personal property is damaged, from the progressive idiots is "That's why you have insurance, just file a claim." Those idiots assumed that insurance companies were just going to take all those claims/losses and that they weren't businesses with budgets and weren't going to recoup those losses via premium increases or dropping some customers. The border problem is not only Biden's fault, but Trump's, Obama's, and all the applicable Congresses to go along with their terms. They had chances to enact strong immigration laws but turned a blind eye to it until it went to what it is now. The migrant crisis is going to cost Biden votes in the next election because even moderate Dems are upset they're seeing services cut, kids sent to online learning while school house migrants for storms, and other impacts on their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 It does no good for conservatives to delegitemize the Supreme Court. You think ACB is rooting for the Democrats? The Supreme Court is how conservatives are going to fix many of the problems we have. Throwing a tantrum when they force you to find a better strategy that aligns with the constitution is a short sighted and stupid plan. I hope Abbott doesn't dick this one up. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger41 Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 As long as Texas and the states supporting them stick together, they should be fine like these brave young patriots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said: It does no good for conservatives to delegitemize the Supreme Court. You think ACB is rooting for the Democrats? The Supreme Court is how conservatives are going to fix many of the problems we have. Throwing a tantrum when they force you to find a better strategy that aligns with the constitution is a short sighted and stupid plan. I hope Abbott doesn't dick this one up. While I don’t necessarily disagree with you on principle of your argument, the left has already said the court is delegitimized due to overturning Roe and a few other cases. Additionally, Biden isn’t following the courts on different rulings as well. So in the end, someone believes the system is working as intended or it’s not…it’s clear that the left doesn’t believe it is, so at what point does the right follow suit in their own way when they believe it’s harming the country? And what will this mean for the future of the country?—it’s not very good, but I think things have been trending that way for quite a while (following what has been going on with the DOJ the last decade?). This is just another large straw on the proverbial camel’s back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosuper Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 (edited) 3 hours ago, HeloDude said: While I don’t necessarily disagree with you on principle of your argument, the left has already said the court is delegitimized due to overturning Roe and a few other cases. Additionally, Biden isn’t following the courts on different rulings as well. So in the end, someone believes the system is working as intended or it’s not…it’s clear that the left doesn’t believe it is, so at what point does the right follow suit in their own way when they believe it’s harming the country? And what will this mean for the future of the country?—it’s not very good, but I think things have been trending that way for quite a while (following what has been going on with the DOJ the last decade?). This is just another large straw on the proverbial camel’s back. I hope Abbott and Biden have a sit down on this. The way the border is defended is wrong, the immigration situation should be settled at a US consulate in whatever country of origin with a proper visa. If not fly them up to Fairbanks in winter or Death Valley in the summer. What I'm scared of is some overzealous Fed will kill a Texas Guardsman for refusing to comply then Eagle Creek turns into the Gaza. DOJ starts charging Americans who ever said online that Biden is a moron with sedition and the active-duty military rank and file refuses to point guns at MAGA Americans which the Democrats would love seeing eradicated. Sounds like it's a good time to have a convention of states to get needed things done in which the Feds and Congress are unwilling to do because it means relinquishing power. Edited January 26 by Prosuper grammer 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 2 hours ago, Prosuper said: Sounds like it's a good time to have a convention of states to get needed things done in which the Feds and Congress are unwilling to do because it means relinquishing power. You can’t “fundamentally transform the United States” (where have I heard that one before?) with a convention of states when 2/3 of the states can’t agree on much and 3/4 of the states can’t agree on hardly anything…so the left would never go for it. Also, the same states that wouldn’t go for it largely want to do away with the Electoral College, so I seriously doubt they want states they don’t like having more state control than they already do. Frankly I’m surprised things like this in Texas haven’t happened more often and earlier. The states wrt their respective values and priorities are further apart than at any other point in my lifetime (and I’m a Gen X’r). And for an ideology who thinks the previous president is a wannabe dictator, literally Hitler, on and on…you would think they would want the federal government to have much less control, not more, just in case he gets back in office? Yeah, I’m going to say the party, who thinks the worst thing to ever happen is allowing individual states to determine when an abortion can happen, isn’t going to be for a convention of states. Things will get worse before it gets better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 The ultimate gas lighting SOB. Biden admin has been denying the border crisis for years. Then they put out this propaganda bull shit. “For too long we all know the borders been broken”. Ufb. And the “deal” he wants passed is HORRIBLE. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 5 hours ago, HeloDude said: So in the end, someone believes the system is working as intended or it’s not…it’s clear that the left doesn’t believe it is, so at what point does the right follow suit in their own way when they believe it’s harming the country? Someone is going to win the culture war. And at the end of that process, they will have to have a system to support. What exactly is the conservative-right defending if they decide that the rule of law isn't a rule at all? Disregarding the supreme court *is* happening the country. It's one thing to adopt legal strategies to defeat the left at their own game. It's another to claim that the problem with the left is their disregard for the law of the land, so we need to disregard the law of the land to beat them. This is the most conservative supreme court in generations. If you lose a case with them deciding, then perhaps your strategy isn't going to be great for the long-term survival of the American system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BashiChuni Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Didn’t the SC rule against Biden’s student loan forgiveness? I seem to keep hearing his administration gloating about forgiving loans recently and wanting to continue doing so. But back to the border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RASH Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 I live in the most conservative county in Colorado. It's clean, nice, and it's 20 miles away from the shit hole known as Denver…Douglas?Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sua Sponte Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 3 hours ago, RASH said: Douglas? Sent from my iPad using Baseops Network mobile app Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 The equivalent of the city of Pittsburg is coming across our border every MONTH. Where are they going, where do they live and who pays for it? Rhetorical of course. Ten retired FBI directors and experts in counter intelligence sent a letter to congressional leaders warning that President Joe Biden’s border policies have facilitated a “soft invasion” into the U.S. of military-age men coming from terror-linked regions, China and Russia. "It would be difficult to overstate the danger represented by the presence inside our borders of what is comparatively a multi division army of young single adult males from hostile nations and regions whose background, intent, or allegiance is completely unknown.” "It would be difficult to overstate the danger represented by the presence inside our borders of what is comparatively a multi division army of young single adult males from hostile nations and regions whose background, intent, or allegiance is completely unknown. They include individuals encountered by border officials and then possibly released into the country, along with the shockingly high estimate of 'gotaways,' meaning those who have entered and evaded apprehension.” Keep in mind, this is EXACTLY what our liberal friends want, they continue to fight for it at every turn, every day. 3 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff_T Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 Can we trade a liberal for an "alien"? One for one swaps at the border. Show us how much you love those little butt munchers. Trade your freedom for someone else's problems. I'd have no problem with that. For real. Shit I'd even give them two libs for one Catholic. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biff_T Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 (edited) 1 hour ago, ClearedHot said: soft invasion” into the U.S. of military-age men coming from terror-linked regions, China and Russia. The cool thing about this, is I have few guns I wanna try out. Let those Chinese and Russians come (sts). I will help them find death. There are more Chinese in LA and OC than the entire population of Pittsburgh (classy town). First generation Chinese. Not dudes who helped build the railroads. They also bought up a ton of property here. They even own part of the port of LA. How dumb is that? Pretty fucking dumb if you ask me. Edited January 27 by Biff_T Afterthought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeA10 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 And the media does not care about the death and destruction in families. 270-ish people died every day for the last couple years...Every freaking day...From opioid overdose. But, nope, can't control the border, can't stop it, just can't do anything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeloDude Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 24 minutes ago, TreeA10 said: And the media does not care about the death and destruction in families. 270-ish people died every day for the last couple years...Every freaking day...From opioid overdose. But, nope, can't control the border, can't stop it, just can't do anything. The same “media” who only continuously reports on a “mass shooting” if a long gun was used by a white straight male, with the second discriminator being most important? The “media” (ie networks, CNN, MSNBC, Fox) are on board with the elites calling what needs to be banned, not banned, more regulated, on and on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 No surprise here... https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/border-patrol-union-makes-it-clear-some-orders-won-t-be-followed-as-texas-ignores-biden-s-big-deadline/ar-BB1hlVMU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbar Posted January 27 Share Posted January 27 7 hours ago, ClearedHot said: Keep in mind, this is EXACTLY what our liberal friends want, they continue to fight for it at every turn, every day. I struggle to think of what one would differently if one were deliberately trying to destroy the USA from within... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now