Federal Judge blocks parts of the Arizona immigration law

[SteamWake]

Not supprising really legislation from the bench.... again....


PHOENIX – A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration

[ETR3(SS)]

Just a thought here, but wouldn't it be interesting if ICE started tracking down and deporting any illegal immigrant that made statements to the media indicating their illegal status? Wonder how that would go?:hmmm:

[Snestorm]

Looks like another chapter of a book that should be titled,
"The Selling Out Of USA".

[WarlordATF]

Yet another case of putting the Illegals ahead of the Citizens. I can't wait until November, its time to shut this administration down and todays ruling will only help the cause.

I'm sure that right now alot of people smarter than me are digging into this Judges background looking for any dirt that can be used against her, i hope they find some.

The only way now to fight back is to boycott any business that you suspect uses illegal workers. There is no law preventing a regular citizen from profiling, if it starts to hurt those with legal status then too bad, they should have supported us when we needed it.

The Funny thing is until this Country decended into insanity i couldn't have cared less about Politics.

[ETR3(SS)]

The only way now to fight back is to boycott any business that you suspect uses illegal workers. There is no law preventing a regular citizen from profiling, if it starts to hurt those with legal status then too bad, they should have supported us when we needed it. Just out of curiosity, how are you going to tell what business use illegals? Also I've heard that agricultural is done by a lot of illegals as well. Plan on boycotting the grocery store?

Now don't get me wrong on the topic, illegal is illegal in my book and something needs to be done.

[Zachstar]

Yet another case of putting the Illegals ahead of the Citizens. I can't wait until November, its time to shut this administration down and todays ruling will only help the cause.

I'm sure that right now alot of people smarter than me are digging into this Judges background looking for any dirt that can be used against her, i hope they find some.

The only way now to fight back is to boycott any business that you suspect uses illegal workers. There is no law preventing a regular citizen from profiling, if it starts to hurt those with legal status then too bad, they should have supported us when we needed it.

The Funny thing is until this Country decended into insanity i couldn't have cared less about Politics.

Trust me the left screamed bloody murder when judges tied to the oil industry ruled to keep drilling going. Nobody gives a rats butt about "background"

[WarlordATF]

Just out of curiosity, how are you going to tell what business use illegals? Also I've heard that agricultural is done by a lot of illegals as well. Plan on boycotting the grocery store?

Now don't get me wrong on the topic, illegal is illegal in my book and something needs to be done.

Im refering more to the local level, your lawn service,your plumbers,construction companys, your corner store, your restarants, ect. if you suspect (You don't have to be sure, just go by gut instinct) they are hiring illegals don't give them your business. If you hired them and you see a bunch of suspected illegals on your property, fire them.

I have already done this with two lawn care companys where only one or two guys spoke english on a crew of 10 to 12. Its far from perfect, but there is little else you can do. If this makes me a racist then so be it, there are far worse things i have been called before.

@Zachstar I still support drilling, We have the oil here why are we giving billions to the arabs for it? The problem with this mess was clearly the fact that they were permitted to modify the overflow valve that normally would have shut this mess down right away. The problem is the politics of the situation, had the rules been followed this would not have happened.

[Snestorm]

Yet another case of putting the Illegals ahead of the Citizens. I can't wait until November, its time to shut this administration down and todays ruling will only help the cause.

That all sounds good but, all you have is The Left (Democrats), and The Artificial "Right" (Republicans).

The Republican Party has been moved to a position just to the right of The Democratic Party, which is still a Hard Left position.

Your whole deck of cards is marked (dirty).
The only way to fix it peacefuly, is to change the whole deck.

[Snestorm]

Im refering more to the local level, your lawn service,your plumbers,construction companys, your corner store, your restarants, ect. if you suspect (You don't have to be sure, just go by gut instinct) they are hiring illegals don't give them your business. If you hired them and you see a bunch of suspected illegals on your property, fire them.

Your recommendation is sound, and has merrit.

[ETR3(SS)]

Im refering more to the local level, your lawn service,your plumbers,construction companys, your corner store, your restarants, ect. if you suspect (You don't have to be sure, just go by gut instinct) they are hiring illegals don't give them your business. If you hired them and you see a bunch of suspected illegals on your property, fire them.

I have already done this with two lawn care companys where only one or two guys spoke english on a crew of 10 to 12. Its far from perfect, but there is little else you can do. If this makes me a racist then so be it, there are far worse things i have been called before.

@Zachstar I still support drilling, We have the oil here why are we giving billions to the arabs for it? The problem with this mess was clearly the fact that they were permitted to modify the overflow valve that normally would have shut this mess down right away. The problem is the politics of the situation, had the rules been followed this would not have happened.The only other alternative would be to turn in the suspected employer, but you'd probably need a little proof for that. That's about all you can do, although you could always shout la migra (sp?) and see how many run just for fun.:haha: As for the oil and the arabs, when it comes down to war over oil and we still have our reserves...

[Tribesman]

Not supprising really legislation from the bench.... again....

So is this the legislation Jan Brewer said would not stand when it was signed not standing as predicted.

[Zachstar]

That all sounds good but, all you have is The Left (Democrats), and The Artificial "Right" (Republicans).

The Republican Party has been moved to a position just to the right of The Democratic Party, which is still a Hard Left position.

Your whole deck of cards is marked (dirty).
The only way to fix it peacefuly, is to change the whole deck.

Just right of the dems? Anti-Choice Anti-Regulation even after a financial disaster Religion in politics? Pro-DOMA and Pro-DADT is that the republicans you call just right?

You sir are scary.

[Snestorm]

Just right of the dems? Anti-Choice Anti-Regulation even after a financial disaster Religion in politics? Pro-DOMA and Pro-DADT is that the republicans you call just right?

You sir are scary.

Outside of their religiouse nonsense, on social issues, they are Left.

Socialism is Leftist.
What have the republicans done to erradicate it? Nothing.

[Skybird]

While I took note of this story going on, I explcitly read in detail only one news article about it, this one:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10800906
And it gave me the strong impression that the judge did not block the law over principle concerns about it'S aim and content, but it'S partial incompatability with guaranteed rights by the constitution:

Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," she added.

That of course can be read two ways. Does the higher interest justify a possibly only minor nuisance for the few and the one? The principle question is whether or not checking somebody's identity is an unacceptable burden to him, limiting his freedom, or not. If you say it is, then any law enforcement can be argued to be breaching the freedom of suspects in case these supects prove to be innocent.

However, the whole debate suffers from one major proboemn, that the racism card was beinbg played. Once you compßlain about anything you do not like beign a racist attack on you, all further disucssion and thinking about it has already been successfully temrinated and shut down. In today' politically most correct times, "racism!" is like yelling "sharks!" at the beach. The reaction already is predetemined and forseeable, and reason is the first victim anyway. even if the shadow labelled shark proves to be just a swarm of herrings or a bluefish, and the accusation of racism lacks any basis.

However, this part I cannot understand, to me it lacks any reason:
The judge also agreed with an argument by the administration of President Barack Obama that "the federal government has long rejected a system by which aliens' papers are routinely demanded and checked".

It should not a court's only basis of decision to follow somebody else's "habits".
If aliens no longer need to be able t prove they are legally present, then de facto you abolish the distinction between legal and illegal aliens. Which might me the intention beyond refusing to check alien's legal status.

However, it is a deeply FUBAR situatio, it seems. Well, england is pressed into appeasement by it's huge Pakistani subcultre, Germany allows to get blackmailed by the Turkish ministry of religion, and America has it'S border and migration issues with - failed? - state of Mexico.Failed state becasue when a goivernment needs to fight a civil war against national organised crime and in certain regions seems to have lost this war, then this is anything but a non-failed state, is it. And if the battle against crime causes the loss of a five digit number of lives, then this is more a civil war than it is a solid state order. I think the US should consider to massively intervene in intel and special operations in Mexico and try to kill as many members and leaders of organised crime as possible. That is less a violation of another anarchy's sovereignity, but a case of own self-defence. And the good news is: doing so would not effect america's supply with oil. :)

[Tribesman]

However, this part I cannot understand, to me it lacks any reason:

I wonder why it lacks sense?
If aliens no longer need to be able t prove they are legally present,
It doesn't say that at all which is why you cannot make sense of it.

[SteamWake]

So when it was signed not standing as predicted.

Source? I couldent find that.

Heres the official Statement by Jan Brewer

http://azgovernor.gov/dms/upload/PR_042310_StatementByGovernorOnSB1070.pdf

[Tribesman]

Source? I couldent find that.

Try the first subsim topic on the issue.

[Platapus]

Im refering more to the local level, your lawn service,your plumbers,construction companys, your corner store, your restarants, ect. if you suspect (You don't have to be sure, just go by gut instinct) they are hiring illegals don't give them your business.


Awesome idea! Penalize small local businesses because of gut instincts. :yeah:

Small businesses who may not be doing anything wrong will then close down due to "gut instinct syndrome". What could be better for our economy than the emotional down-selection of businesses due to "gut instinct". :yeah:

Drive small businesses out of the area! Hey, I don't have to be sure, it ain't my business :nope:

"you don't have to be sure".... awesome moral there! That's the sign of an intelligent and mature outlook. Why be sure, when you can just use your gut to make decisions! :salute:

[thorn69]

At least the illegals are leaving Arizona in droves! The law might have been somewhat limited here but illegals are still leaving Arizona so it worked out regardless and that's all that matters. Get those taco peddling bastards out of America! :up:

[Tribesman]

Get those taco peddling bastards out of America!
Would you like to join Snestorm in the white supremacist club?
Not calling you a brain dead neo nazi of course but can you explain how selling a taco makes you an illegal immigrant?

[mookiemookie]

Would you like to join Snestorm in the white supremacist club?
Not calling you a brain dead neo nazi of course but can you explain how selling a taco makes you an illegal immigrant?

Ignore him. This is the kind of bigoted trash that we can do without here.

[ETR3(SS)]

If selling a taco makes you an illegal, I know a bunch of fat white nerds living in their mothers basement that need to be deported immediately!:har:

[Sailor Steve]

Gone for who-knows how long, and the very first post pick up the racism right where it left off.

[Tribesman]

Gone for who-knows how long, and the very first post pick up the racism right where it left off.

OK back to the specifics.
Ain't it funny that Brewer signed it knowing parts of it wouldn't stand, the arizona crowd altered it because they knew parts of it ouldn't stand.
And now its getting grief from the courts as it cannot stand on the issues that Brewer said would stand for the very reasons that Brewer said had made it OK.

I am still waiting for them to try and work out how to train their police on how to enforce the unenforceable aspects of it and how to water down the fiscal clawback angle they foolishly wrote into it in a way that means the State taxpayer is going to be severely screwed for generations to come.

Knee jerk legislation, pandering to populism with very little real thought:down:

[mookiemookie]

It's rare that I read something that I agree with 100%. This is one such article:

That's because, frankly, after several weeks of digesting arguments in favor and against the Arizona law, I can't figure out which group of actors I find less sympathetic.

There are the Arizonans who play dumb about why it is that their state became, in the past 20 years, a magnet for illegal immigrants when they must know full well that it's because so many Arizonans hire illegal immigrants to do jobs that Arizonans won't do.

And then we have the illegal immigrants themselves, who seem to be shocked and offended the United States dares to enforce its laws and some of whom are fleeing the state because, up to now, they've been playing dumb about what it means to be living in this country illegally.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/28/navarrette.arizona.law/index.html

Neither side is right in this issue.

[Tribesman]

Neither side is right in this issue.
Which is why there is no side to take which is where again and again these Arizona topics fail.

The legislation is crap, no two ways about it, it won't work.
Yet if you say the legislation is crap and object to it then all of a sudden out fly the accusations that somehow you support illegal immigration or are anti american or both??????

[Aramike]

It's rare that I read something that I agree with 100%. This is one such article:



http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/28/navarrette.arizona.law/index.html

Neither side is right in this issue.Neither side has a clear "side" on the issue.

Ultimately, what needs to happen is the border needs to be closed. Period. End of discussion. In fact, politicians should not discuss ANYTHING about what should happen afterwards, because it's all moot and is routinely used as way to avoid taking the first, necessary step.

As far as the Arizona law goes, well, I just can't imagine the mindset one must have to have a problem with, quite literally, criminalizing an illegal behavior. I mean, really?

[The Third Man]

Section 2.


In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.

[thorn69]

Would you like to join Snestorm in the white supremacist club?

It's not a white supremacist club at all. It's a non-criminal club!

BTW, there are many Hispanics, Blacks, Asians, and other ethnic groups that are a part of this "club" that want to see criminals get forced out of our country.



Not calling you a brain dead neo nazi of course but can you explain how selling a taco makes you an illegal immigrant?Simple. Selling tacos in this country without having US citizenship or a green card makes you an illegal immigrant. So therefore you should GTFO!

[The Third Man]

Section 2.


In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.

Perhaps something happened, but the judge of record has no jurisdiction here. Only the SCOTUS is the court of record. when it comes to states being part of the proceedings. We saw this when GWB stole the election from Al Gore.

[thorn69]

Ignore him. This is the kind of bigoted trash that we can do without here.


Ah, ignore anybody who disagrees! The only Nazi here is people like this POS!

[Onkel Neal]

You're out of here.

[krashkart]

And thus ended the great taco debacle (or, reparations for an insulted taco). :woot:

[August]

We saw this when GWB stole the election from Al Gore.

:roll:

[Sailor Steve]

:roll:
'S okay. Some people see only the "facts" they want to see, and nothing else counts.

[The Third Man]

:roll:

Did not SCOTUS step in when the state was accused of a misdeed during the 2000 campaign? Same as AZ, accused for a missdeed. The lower courts have no jurisdiction here, if you believe in the constitution.

Section 2.



In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.

[CaptainHaplo]

The Third Man - while constitutionally you are correct, since 1978 this matter has been specifically changed through an initial Congressional action and tacit approval of the Court itself.

While its in the last bit of the page - you may find this enlightening on the matter:

http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/article-3/24-suits-affecting-ambassadors.html

[August]

'S okay. Some people see only the "facts" they want to see, and nothing else counts.

Yeah and it's off topic anyways.

[Sailor Steve]

Did not SCOTUS step in when the state was accused of a misdeed during the 2000 campaign? Same as AZ, accused for a missdeed. The lower courts have no jurisdiction here, if you believe in the constitution.

Section 2.
1. When the Democrats demanded a recount, a recount was had. And another. And another. And another.

2. Finally, Florida's Attorney General said enough was enough. Whether you think that was right; whether you think it was politically motivated; that was part of her job and her prerogative.

3. The Gore camp went to the Florida State Supreme Court and they overturned her decision.

4. The Bush Camp then went to the US Supreme Court and they in turn overturned the Florida Court's ruling.

The point is that you can argue that any of those decisions was political or legitimate. What is downright silly is claiming that Bush "stole" the election. It is just as valid to argue that Bush was ahead, the Attorney General was correct in her action, and that Gore attempted to use the State Court to steal the election.

Unless you can actually show impropriety on the part of the Supreme Court, claiming "theft" shows a lack of understanding of how the system works.

[August]

1. When the Democrats demanded a recount, a recount was had. And another. And another. And another.

2. Finally, Florida's Attorney General said enough was enough. Whether you think that was right; whether you think it was politically motivated; that was part of her job and her prerogative.

3. The Gore camp went to the Florida State Supreme Court and they overturned her decision.

4. The Bush Camp then went to the US Supreme Court and they in turn overturned the Florida Court's ruling.

The point is that you can argue that any of those decisions was political or legitimate. What is downright silly is claiming that Bush "stole" the election. It is just as valid to argue that Bush was ahead, the Attorney General was correct in her action, and that Gore attempted to use the State Court to steal the election.

Unless you can actually show impropriety on the part of the Supreme Court, claiming "theft" shows a lack of understanding of how the system works.

This ^

[Zachstar]

You're out of here.

Thank you Neal! Hopefully it wont take a billion alerts next time.

[Onkel Neal]

I don't mind billions of alerts, just not all by the same person, and all in the same day. :D

[Platapus]

You're out of here.

:yeah::salute:

Some people just don't belong sitting at the adult table.

Thanks Neal, I am sure that is not the most enjoyable aspect of running this website. :salute:

[Subnuts]

I don't want to sound racist, but Get those taco peddling bastards out of America! :up:

Fixed.

Not that it matters, though.

[mookiemookie]

Ignore him. This is the kind of bigoted trash that we can do without here.

For the record, I was referring to the content of his post. But it's all a moot point now.

[Jimbuna]

Didn't he pass himself off as an officer of the law? :hmmm:

[August]

Didn't he pass himself off as an officer of the law? :hmmm:

Yeah, unsuccessfully I might add.

[Jimbuna]

Yeah, unsuccessfully I might add.

LOL :DL

[ETR3(SS)]

More like an officer of the lol.

[August]

More like an officer of the lol.

The Constable of Fail.

[Jimbuna]

More like an officer of the lol.

The Constable of Fail.

:DL

[Zachstar]

Didn't he pass himself off as an officer of the law? :hmmm:

That is what offended me the most. In my opinion he isnt an officer and it is HIGHLY offensive when you know officers who go out on the dangerous streets of Shreveport and just try to do their jobs and make the town a bit safer and help the community... Yet still have time and kindness to have a friendly conversation, joke around, and be part of the community.

When scum in my opinion impersonate officers on the net it helps build the fake meme that officers are "Against you" "Want a police state" or other stuff. It makes the jobs of the men and women of police departments that much harder and more dangerous.

There is room for civil discussion on the issue of immigration. Tho I am a progressive I am very PRO drone surveillance for instance. There is no room however for racists in the debate.

[baggygreen]

Tho I am a progressive I am very PRO drone surveillance for instance. There is no room however for racists in the debate.
You might've mentioned before mate, but what's your stance on fencing the border a la israel?

In this instance there would be no issues with territory being contested for ownership..?

[Zachstar]

I do not think it is possible to fence in properly such a large area. Funds just wouldn't hold and somehow they will find a way through it.

No we need more drones and tougher fines against companies that hire unlawful aliens.

[mookiemookie]

If they're willing to brave a 2 day trek through a burning desert, I'm not sure how a fence would stop anyone. They'd just climb it or tunnel under it, like they're already doing: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012601963.html

It'd be wasted money.

[SteamWake]

An esteemed learned spokesperson states her views...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/08/02/2010-08-02_lady_gaga_slams_arizona_immigration_law_during_ phoenix_concert.html

[yubba]

In my humble opinion if a person comes into the country illegally, they are criminals and since they are not citizens, they have no rights , how ever :rock:they do have the right to go back where they came from under their own power.

[The Third Man]

Sancturary cities are now banned under this ruling?

Wil the Obama Administration sue these cities in federal court for creating a hodgepodge of city laws?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg/800px-US_Sanctuary_Cities_Map.svg.png

[The Third Man]

In my humble opinion if a person comes into the country illegally, they are criminals and since they are not citizens, they have no rights , how ever :rock:they do have the right to go back where they came from under their own power.

Agreed. How long should we give them 14 days?

[Tribesman]

In my humble opinion if a person comes into the country illegally, they are criminals and since they are not citizens, they have no rights
How can you match that opinion to US law?

[Zachstar]

If they're willing to brave a 2 day trek through a burning desert, I'm not sure how a fence would stop anyone. They'd just climb it or tunnel under it, like they're already doing: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012601963.html

It'd be wasted money.

That is why in my opinion a BUNCH of money is needed to make a boatload of drones. Fences or other defence measures have failed. Drones do far more to spot the groups of illegals crossing overground.

[ETR3(SS)]

There's one surefire way to stem the flow of illegals, annex Mexico! :up:

[Sailor Steve]

There's one surefire way to stem the flow of illegals, annex Mexico! :up:
There was one faction that proposed exactly that after the Mexican-American war of 1846-1848. I'm not saying it is really the answer, or even an answer, but I can see a couple of benefits:

All Mexicans would become Americans, which would solve the "illegal" question.

Mexico would be brought up to American standards, ending the desire to go from there to here.

The US southern border would become much smaller, and much easier to patrol (or even wall off if desired).

And those are observations, not suggestions, and not to be taken seriously.

[ETR3(SS)]

Oh it's by no means meant to be a serious answer, and I think you understood that too. If we did annex Mexico, all of the violence that happens down there with the various cartels would then be our problem to deal with. Mexico's economy isn't something to laugh at but it wouldn't last as all the manufacturing jobs there would leave in search of cheaper labor elsewhere. So the cons outweigh the pros to this one.

[Sailor Steve]

Oh it's by no means meant to be a serious answer, and I think you understood that too.
Oh, absolutely. I just wanted to point out that at one point it was considered seriously.

I agree that the cons outway the pros, but the pros are interesting.

[UnderseaLcpl]

That is why in my opinion a BUNCH of money is needed to make a boatload of drones. Fences or other defence measures have failed. Drones do far more to spot the groups of illegals crossing overground.

Is that your answer for everything? Drones? I mean, I can kind of understand that because drones are cool and there are a lot of very good reasons to use them, but do you ever stop and think about any kind of pre-emptive solution?

The question here is not how to stop illegals from getting across the border, it's why they want to get across the border, why they do it illegally, and why people are opposed to immigration from Mexico.

Illegals, much like legals, come here in search of a better life. Who can blame them for that? Pretty much every American's ancestors came here for the same reason. Unless they're racist, few would have a problem with Mexican immigrants. They're a great source of cheap labor, and within a few generations they're indistinguishable from all the wonderful white people, save for copper skin and Catholicism and Tex-Mex. They only come here illegally because we make it so hard for them to come here legally.

So why are people opposed to Mexican immigration? Well, part of it is because an influx of immigrants drives down labor costs by virtue of the very elementary mechanisms of supply and demand. However, since most Mexican immigrants are very unskilled and cannot speak proper English, they only drive labor costs down in industries nobody wants to work for, anyway. They do have a tendency to supplant the native workforce after a few generations in-country because they have been "Americanized", but WTF kind of reason is that to keep them out? We want the Mexicans out because we don't want to compete with them for jobs? ******* you!. We might as well go back to the turn of the century when people beat the crap out of Irish immigrants for the same reason. What is it with this country and wanting to beat up drunk Catholics? Seriously...

I could go on, but I'm going to just go ahead and give you all the answers because I don't feel like typing ten more pages concerning the arguments over immigration and why we get pissed off at illegal immigration even though we created the circumstances for it. The reason is that this is a politicized issue. As with every issue in a two-party system, this one has divided people along two sides they often know nothing about. Democrats support amnesty and whatever other junk they're espousing these days without realizing that their leaders are only in favor of illegal immigration because they are courting the latino vote with all kinds of BS social initiatives. Republicans hate illegal immigration because they've been convinced that immigrants are stealing jobs and destroying American values or something, as if that had ever happened before, without realizing that the real reason they hate immigration is because their leaders are against the Democratic stance.

The point is that this is a political fight more than anything else, and what is your answer? Drones? The border patrol budget as of today is enough to place agents at 40-ft intervals along the entire US-Mexican border at the rate of $35 per hour, not including what the DEA spends to police the same area. Given that, do you really imagine that anybody's goal is to keep illegal immigrants out? It's not even a conspiracy, it's just the sum total of a bunch of parties with goals that do not include immigration in anything other than a lip-service political context. How would drones ever fix that? Do you even think about this stuff?

[Zachstar]

Do you ever think of anything other than "labor costs" and Union busting? Because frankly that is all I ever hear from your walls of text.

[Sailor Steve]

Do you ever think of anything other than "labor costs" and Union busting? Because frankly that is all I ever hear from your walls of text.
I guess if you don't read the "walls of text" you don't have to answer the questions. Easy way out.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Do you ever think of anything other than "labor costs" and Union busting? Because frankly that is all I ever hear from your walls of text.

There's a good reason for that and it falls under the classification of economics. Economics, along with politics, make the world go 'round, my friend, not just whatever idea you happened to come up with. My point is that the issue is bigger than what you see. You can't very well understand something without knowing how it works, and I am attempting to illustrate how it works.

Of course, you could always throw drones or money or whatever at the problem to no effect. That seems to be the popular strategy anymore.

[Zachstar]

I guess if you don't read the "walls of text" you don't have to answer the questions. Easy way out.

I have to subject myself to these foolish walls of text. Where it runs around the point that "More people = Cheaper labor and easier union busting & union teachers ruin education"

It's not funny nor is it cool. It's the usual bullcrap cheaping of labor done in this country. The labor by citizens that do backbreaking or long and demanding work. And frankly both parties do this.

Illegial immigration has given the companies that can hire mass amounts with the excuse "Nobody else will do the job" A reason to keep wages at minimum without benefits. Major pressure on the job and the threat of instant job termination without any kind of oversight. If the problem were under control they would be forced to hire citizens that may not put up with their bullcrap when working for a fast food joint would be far better. They would be forced to offer better wages and more benefits then guess what? Americans would want to do the work again.

However, That concept of companies having to pay a fair wage to support their communities is one of the most feared outcomes of many businesses out there that have gotten used to exploiting people who have nothing to use to bargain with. With drones and a massive undertaking to issue heavy fines to businesses while at the same time giving people here illegally the resources they need to become citizens, the means to demand better conditions and better wages and unlawful immigration will plummet.

You want walls of text there you go. Want not? Here it is in simple form.

Acting like unlawful immigration is no big deal and good for business is union busting plain and simple.