Disgracing America?
01-18-2008, 04:50 PM
#32
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Way Out West
Posts: 2,547
mikecronis;
There are certainly problems with the Congress, but when it comes to the integrity of our borders and immigration law enforcement, it's all about the President.
Congress did its job long ago. Most folks don't realize it, but it is already a federal felony to hire an illegal alien, to rent property to an illegal alien, give a bank account to an illegal alien etc. And of course, if someone enters/lives in the U.S. without permission, the law says they get arrested and deported. Problem is that the legislative branch passes, but doesn't enforce the laws. That is the responsibilty of the executive branch, ie; the President.
You need a President who honors his oath of office, who allows and instructs federal agencies to do their jobs and enforce the law. We have no such President.
Congress can be pressured to reject amnesty, as many of us successfully did in '06 and again in '07, but Congress can't make the President faithfully execute his office.
There are certainly problems with the Congress, but when it comes to the integrity of our borders and immigration law enforcement, it's all about the President.
Congress did its job long ago. Most folks don't realize it, but it is already a federal felony to hire an illegal alien, to rent property to an illegal alien, give a bank account to an illegal alien etc. And of course, if someone enters/lives in the U.S. without permission, the law says they get arrested and deported. Problem is that the legislative branch passes, but doesn't enforce the laws. That is the responsibilty of the executive branch, ie; the President.
You need a President who honors his oath of office, who allows and instructs federal agencies to do their jobs and enforce the law. We have no such President.
Congress can be pressured to reject amnesty, as many of us successfully did in '06 and again in '07, but Congress can't make the President faithfully execute his office.
01-18-2008, 05:12 PM
#33
Administrator
World Champion
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
...Congress did its job long ago. Most folks don't realize it, but it is already a federal felony to hire an illegal alien, to rent property to an illegal alien, give a bank account to an illegal alien etc. And of course, if someone enters/lives in the U.S. without permission, the law says they get arrested and deported. Problem is that the legislative branch passes, but doesn't enforce the laws. That is the responsibilty of the executive branch, ie; the President.....
01-18-2008, 05:38 PM
#34
BANNED IN D.C.
SuperSport
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 701
mikecronis;
There are certainly problems with the Congress, but when it comes to the integrity of our borders and immigration law enforcement, it's all about the President.
Congress did its job long ago. Most folks don't realize it, but it is already a federal felony to hire an illegal alien, to rent property to an illegal alien, give a bank account to an illegal alien etc. And of course, if someone enters/lives in the U.S. without permission, the law says they get arrested and deported. Problem is that the legislative branch passes, but doesn't enforce the laws. That is the responsibilty of the executive branch, ie; the President.
You need a President who honors his oath of office, who allows and instructs federal agencies to do their jobs and enforce the law. We have no such President.
Congress can be pressured to reject amnesty, as many of us successfully did in '06 and again in '07, but Congress can't make the President faithfully execute his office.
There are certainly problems with the Congress, but when it comes to the integrity of our borders and immigration law enforcement, it's all about the President.
Congress did its job long ago. Most folks don't realize it, but it is already a federal felony to hire an illegal alien, to rent property to an illegal alien, give a bank account to an illegal alien etc. And of course, if someone enters/lives in the U.S. without permission, the law says they get arrested and deported. Problem is that the legislative branch passes, but doesn't enforce the laws. That is the responsibilty of the executive branch, ie; the President.
You need a President who honors his oath of office, who allows and instructs federal agencies to do their jobs and enforce the law. We have no such President.
Congress can be pressured to reject amnesty, as many of us successfully did in '06 and again in '07, but Congress can't make the President faithfully execute his office.
01-18-2008, 06:07 PM
#35
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Way Out West
Posts: 2,547
The federal courts (judicial branch) rule on the law, issue warrants and indictments, conduct trials, hand down sentences etc.
It is the FBI, ICE, DEA etc.(Justice Dept.-executive branch) who actually enforce.
01-18-2008, 06:18 PM
#36
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Way Out West
Posts: 2,547
01-19-2008, 06:23 AM
#38
Administrator
World Champion
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
Wikipedia has some pretty good reading on this stuff. I've never really been a history and government buff and hated all those classes when I took them in school, but I'm actually finding some of this to be kinda interesting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INS_v._Chadha is a pretty good read. I think that this kind of thing sends a message out to law enforcement, and even though it was way back in '83 when this happened, it's still a Supreme Court ruling and has a lot of impact. I wouldn't doubt that this is one reason why our deportation and illegal alien laws are not strongly enforced.
01-19-2008, 09:14 AM
#39
Senior Member
MotoGP
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Way Out West
Posts: 2,547
Greg;
I think you're right that it's both of them in the sense that executive branch law enforcement and judicial branch courts are part of the same overall start to finish system, and if both aren't doing their job and cooperating with the other, the system breaks down.
On immigration, I think it is the executive branch President and his agency appointees
who aren't doing their jobs. Before the courts can rule, order people deported or not etc., somebody's got to be arresting people, somebody's gotta be trying to deport people, somebody's got to actually be enforcing the laws, right? That is the duty of the executive branch President and his executive branch enforcement agencies. They aren't doing it.
So yeah, the courts are part of the same overall "legal system" as the federal enforcement agencies, but the courts don't patrol the border, investigate smuggling rings or apprehend illegal aliens. That's the role of the executive. Neither the legislative or judicial branches are preventing him from doing it or even have the power to prevent him from doing it. He's simply refusing to do it.
I want to read/think more about the Chahda case you linked at Wiki before I comment on it. Quick read says it looks like more a separtation of powers case than immigration case per se, but shows how hard it is for one branch to make another branch do something it doesn't want to.
I think you're right that it's both of them in the sense that executive branch law enforcement and judicial branch courts are part of the same overall start to finish system, and if both aren't doing their job and cooperating with the other, the system breaks down.
On immigration, I think it is the executive branch President and his agency appointees
who aren't doing their jobs. Before the courts can rule, order people deported or not etc., somebody's got to be arresting people, somebody's gotta be trying to deport people, somebody's got to actually be enforcing the laws, right? That is the duty of the executive branch President and his executive branch enforcement agencies. They aren't doing it.
So yeah, the courts are part of the same overall "legal system" as the federal enforcement agencies, but the courts don't patrol the border, investigate smuggling rings or apprehend illegal aliens. That's the role of the executive. Neither the legislative or judicial branches are preventing him from doing it or even have the power to prevent him from doing it. He's simply refusing to do it.
I want to read/think more about the Chahda case you linked at Wiki before I comment on it. Quick read says it looks like more a separtation of powers case than immigration case per se, but shows how hard it is for one branch to make another branch do something it doesn't want to.
01-20-2008, 03:16 PM
#41
Administrator
World Champion
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fulton, MO
Posts: 105,287
Lite,
It's pretty normal to get a politics thread on here every once in a while. Back in the day of the RunLevelZero email list it was rampid with them. The founder of this forum carried on the tradition by offering the "NVT" section just for this purpose. So, if you don't like politics just ignore the thread. I try to stay away as much as possible but every once in a while I'm inclined to respond.
It's pretty normal to get a politics thread on here every once in a while. Back in the day of the RunLevelZero email list it was rampid with them. The founder of this forum carried on the tradition by offering the "NVT" section just for this purpose. So, if you don't like politics just ignore the thread. I try to stay away as much as possible but every once in a while I'm inclined to respond.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
