close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Supreme Court Upholds Key Part of Arizona Law

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by nmk, Jun 25, 2012.

  1. Yep they upheld the "show your papers" portion which is a win for AZ.
    Opinion here...
    6/25/12 - Arizona v. United States

    Libs and the MSM will spin the AZ opinion as a win, even though the heart of the case was upheld.
     


  2. hogfish

    hogfish Señor Member

    5,508
    542
    Aug 4, 2005
    fl
    This helps. It's too bad the federal government's open border policy forces a state into this mess.

    :miff:
     
  3. JBnTX

    JBnTX Bible Thumper

    20,020
    4,169
    Aug 28, 2008
    Fort Worth Texas
  4. MSNBC is already spining the AZ opinion as a win...
    High court strikes down key parts of Arizona immigration law
     
  5. It's too bad the self-proclaimed Party of Principle hasn't got a clue:


    I'm glad that we will never have a Libertarian President or Congress:

    Such timeless matters of principle cannot shift with political winds, Libertarians will destroy their glorious party if they pander to polls for political expedience. Oh wait......:tinfoil:
     
  6. hogfish

    hogfish Señor Member

    5,508
    542
    Aug 4, 2005
    fl
    Hah! You got me there! :supergrin:

    You are right, of course. I believe you must be a citizen to have all the protections the constitution provides.

    Know that this derailment is your fault. :rofl:
     
  7. SGT HATRED

    SGT HATRED

    4,000
    298
    Sep 30, 2010
    PHX AZ
    Not a slam dunk but it sure beats a total shut out...
     
  8. Cavalry Doc

    Cavalry Doc MAJ (USA Ret.)

    34,969
    9
    Feb 22, 2005
    Republic of Texas
    Sounds good to me,but if they are under 30, with Barry in office, all they have to claim is that they came to Amerika as a child.

    They could explain that in court though.
     
  9. One out of four isn't much of a victory to me.... Just my two cents. I guess some are satisfied with allowing immigrants to work without permits. Police can't arrest an immigrant they believe has committed a deportable offense. In addition, it's not a crime for immigrants who fail to carry registration documents.

    This is not much to cheer about.....
     
  10. It appears that even though they upheld the bit about showing the papers they indicate that it could (should?) be challenged.
     
  11. Scalia makes this statement at the end of his opinion...
    Emphasis mine.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  12. Jerry

    Jerry Staff Member Moderator Millennium Member

    4,116
    1
    Dec 21, 1998
    Louisiana
    :upeyes:

    When I am stopped for a "traffic violation" I must produce my "papers" (driving is a privilege) why shouldn't an illegal submit to the same? If I'm "arrested" for commuting a crime, drugs, robbery, assault and etc. I must produce my "papers" why shouldn't an illegal? :dunno:
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  13. Jerry

    Jerry Staff Member Moderator Millennium Member

    4,116
    1
    Dec 21, 1998
    Louisiana
    Just now, noon, Local "Fox news" channel 8. The Supreme Court leaves intact the portion of the law that states the Federal Government can stop local law reinforcement form demanding proof of citizenship. Then, at the end, the law allows Arizona law enforcement to ask for proof of citizenship if a person is involved in a traffic stop or during the investigation of a crime. I so love the double talk spin. :upeyes:
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  14. Any chance they might lie?
    :whistling:
     
  15. Gundude

    Gundude

    7,491
    507
    Mar 7, 2003
    Hmm, this sounds like exactly the kind of "spin" you're projecting onto the MSM. The one out of four parts that is upheld just happens to be the "heart of the case"?

    So police can "ask for papers", they just can't do anything about it if you're illegal?
     
  16. Were there not lots of protests over this law because immigrants content they'd be racially profiled and asked to prove their immigration status? Was not the chief complaint from many of those protesters that the AZ police were being given the power to stop people and asking them to show papers?

    While the court indicated law enforcement couldn't "racially profile", once stopped and detained or arrested the immigration status could still be checked. The court indicated the stop must be in accordance with established federal immigration and civil rights laws. So it still means that those who are illegal (cannot prove legal residency) could still be reported by AZ police to ICE if they are stopped and detained/arrested. From the opinion...
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012
  17. Gundude

    Gundude

    7,491
    507
    Mar 7, 2003
    Uh, isn't ICE the problem AZ was trying to get around?

    Now that it's obvious to all that there will be no consequence to being discovered as an illegal, the illegals don't need to worry as much about being questioned about it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2012