Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
December 18, 2014, 06:59:49 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Unconstitutional?  (Read 7666 times)
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« on: July 29, 2010, 09:09:27 AM »

Here is where you can find the USofA constitution.

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am14

Where is it written in there something that prohibits what Arizona is wanting to do. I'm not the brightest bulb in the box and seem to be having trouble finding it.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
Storm
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 72

Location: Oklahoma


« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2010, 02:12:37 PM »

In fact, I believe the question was settled definitively by the 10th Amendment http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am10.  It is the Federal law which is in violation of the Constitution here, not the Arizona law.  This is not one of the enumerated powers, so state law is supreme.
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2010, 02:51:05 PM »

I did find this,

Article 1 section 8 (of constitution)

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

Then this is what I found on Naturalization;

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2005/12/Congress-and-the-Naturalization-of-Immigrants

Congress and the Naturalization of Immigrants
Published on December 1, 2005 by Joseph Bessette

The following is an entry concerning the fourth section of Article I Clause 8 of the Constitution as found in The Heritage Guide to the Constitution.


Few powers are more fundamental to sovereignty than the control over immigration and the vesting of citizenship in aliens (naturalization). According to the Declaration of Independence, "obstructing the Laws for the Naturalization of Foreigners" was one of the grievances that led the American colonists to break with Britain.

Under the Articles of Confederation, each state retained authority over the naturalization of aliens. This resulted in widely varying state practices, which James Madison in The Federalist No. 42 called a "fault" and "defect" of the Confederation. At the Constitutional Convention, there was virtually no opposition to moving the naturalization power from the states to the new national government, and in the ratification debates only a handful of Anti-Federalists even raised the issue. James Madison seemed to speak the sentiment of most when at the Convention he expressed his wish "to invite foreigners of merit & republican principles among us. America was indebted to emigration for her settlement & prosperity."

Congress passed the first "uniform Rule of Naturalization" under the new Constitution in March 1790. It allowed "any alien, being a free white person" and "of good character" who had resided in the United States for two years to become a "citizen of the United States" by taking an oath in court "to support the constitution of the United States." Although Alexander Hamilton had argued in The Federalist No. 32 that the power to establish "an uniform rule of naturalization . . . must necessarily be exclusive; because if each State had power to prescribe a distinct rule, there could not be a uniform rule," some states continued to naturalize foreigners even after Congress had acted. In 1795, Congress claimed exclusive authority over naturalization by establishing new conditions-"and not otherwise"-for aliens "to become a citizen of the United States, or any of them." In Chirac v. Lessee of Chirac (1817), the Supreme Court affirmed that "the power of naturalization is exclusively in congress," notwithstanding any state laws to the contrary.

Individual naturalizations following Congress's "uniform Rule" were not the only avenues to citizenship for those who were not American citizens by birth. The incorporation of the Louisiana Territory and Florida into the Union in the first decades of the nineteenth century raised the issue of whether the national government through treaty or law could vest citizenship collectively. a federal circuit court in 1813 and then the Supreme Court in American Insurance Co. v. 356 Bales of Cotton (1828) upheld collective naturalization. Moreover, in 1848 the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican-American War, offered the Mexican inhabitants of the territories ceded to the United States the option of maintaining their Mexican citizenship or, if they made no such request, becoming American citizens.

From the beginning, American naturalization law and practice assumed that a free citizen of one country had the right to transfer his allegiance to another if the latter allowed: hence, the provision of the 1795 law that required the new citizen to "absolutely and entirely renounce" any previous allegiance. However, this essential element of social-contract theory-that political communities are the free association of individuals to promote their mutual security and happiness-violated settled European norms. Sir William Blackstone had written in Commentaries on the Laws of England that the "natural allegiance" owed by all those born within the sovereign's domain could not be "forfeited, cancelled, or altered" by any act of the subject himself, including moving to another country and "swearing allegiance to another."

This conflict of views on the legitimacy of voluntary expatriation led to considerable conflict between the new nation and both Britain and France, especially when the latter two nations captured on the high seas and impressed into their naval service former nationals who had moved to the United States. This was one of the American grievances that led to the War of 1812. As late as the 1860s, the British government refused to recognize the American naturalization of former Irish subjects. In response, Congress passed the Expatriation Act of 1868, which declared that "the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Key criteria for citizenship of the Naturalization Act of 1795 remain part of American law. These include (1) five years of (lawful) residence within the United States; (2) a "good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States"; (3) the taking of a formal oath to support the Constitution and to renounce any foreign allegiance; and (4) the renunciation of any hereditary titles.

Current law, which is much more detailed than the first naturalization statutes, also requires competency in the English language and excludes those who advocate world communism or the violent overthrow of the government of the United States. Also, current law prohibits discrimination in naturalization on the basis of race, sex, or marital status. The elements of the oath have been expanded to include a solemn commitment "to support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; . . . to bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and . . . to bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law, or . . . to perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law" (with exceptions for conscientious objectors).

Federal law and regulations establish procedures, administered by the Department of State, by which Americans can voluntarily renounce their citizenship. In addition, federal law lists a variety of acts that shall result in the loss of citizenship if "voluntarily perform[ed] . . . with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality." These include obtaining naturalization in a foreign state; declaring allegiance to a foreign state; serving in the armed forces of a foreign state as an officer or when the foreign state is engaged in hostilities against the United States; and, in some cases, serving in governmental office in a foreign state.

Prior to several important Supreme Court decisions in the last half of the twentieth century, federal law had also required loss of citizenship for, among other acts, voting in a foreign election; deserting during wartime; leaving the country during wartime to evade military service; and, for those who acquired dual nationality at birth, voluntarily seeking or claiming the benefits of foreign nationality and residing in the foreign state for three years continuously after the age of twenty-two.

Although the Supreme Court in MacKenzie v. Hare (1915) upheld Congress's power to expatriate, in 1958 the Court began to cut back on Congress's power in a number of closely decided cases. Although it upheld expatriation for voting in a foreign election, Perez v. Brownell (1958), it overturned expatriations for desertion from the military during wartime, Trop v. Dulles (1958), and for service by a dual national in the Japanese army during World War II, Nishikawa v. Dulles (1958). In 1963, in Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, the Court ruled that a citizen could not be expatriated for fleeing the country during wartime to evade military service. The following year, it extended the limits on expatriation to naturalized citizens who returned to their native countries and resided there for at least three years. Schneider v. Rusk (1964). Then in Afroyim v. Rusk (1967), it overturned Perez v. Brownell by ruling that a naturalized American citizen who relocated to Israel and voted in an election for the Israeli Knesset could not lose his citizenship as a result.

In Rogers v. Bellei (1971), however, the Court did uphold a statute requiring that if a person acquires United States citizenship by virtue of having been born abroad to an American citizen, he shall lose his citizenship unless he resides in the United States continuously for five years between the ages of fourteen and twenty-eight. But this statute applied only to a person who was neither born in the United States nor naturalized in the United States. In any event, in 1978, Congress removed from federal law the residency requirements upheld in Rogers v. Bellei.

Finally, in Vance v. Terrazas (1980), the Court clarified its decision in Afroyim by holding that it was not enough to show that an individual voluntarily committed an act that Congress determined was inconsistent with American citizenship. It was necessary also to show independently that the individual "intended to relinquish his citizenship." Given the broad language of the more recent cases, it seems that no involuntary expatriations are lawful. The one exception, which applies only to naturalized Americans, is the denaturalization (and deportation) of those who became citizens through fraud or illegality. It has been applied most notably in recent decades to former Nazis who engaged in war crimes during World War II and later lied about their wartime activities either when they entered the United States as "displaced persons" or when they applied for citizenship.

Until recent decades, American public policy consistently prohibited dual citizenship. Since 1795, Congress has required that all candidates for naturalization formally renounce allegiance to their native land and any other foreign power. That requirement remains a part of national law and is an integral element of the citizenship oath. The rationale for these policies is that citizenship requires undivided loyalty to one country.

Yet today there are millions of American citizens who are also citizens of other countries. Many are naturalized American citizens whose native countries do not recognize the renunciation of loyalty that their native citizens make in the American citizenship oath. Others are the offspring of one American parent and one foreign parent, deriving citizenship from both sides, or foreign-born children adopted by American parents. Because the courts now prohibit the government from expatriating those who maintain an active citizenship in a foreign nation (some American citizens have even held political office in other countries), dual citizenship has become a fact of American life, despite statutory law.

Joseph Bessette is Professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2010, 03:03:11 PM »

but, the AZ law was not establishing a separate law for immigration or naturalization.  it was designed to enforce existing federal law using the resources of the state.  it would be a different matter if the AZ law were in conflict with federal law, but it's not.

even if it were, there is precedent for state laws not being challenged when they are in conflict with federal law.  medical marijuana is one.  my state allows it, but it is against federal law.  the admin has stated that they will not enforce the federal laws against states that have allowed medical MJ.

INS says that states arresting illegals will overwhelm their system.  so the feds can't/won't enforce the law and the DOJ will keep states from enforcing the law.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Storm
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 72

Location: Oklahoma


« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2010, 04:08:10 PM »

but, the AZ law was not establishing a separate law for immigration or naturalization.  it was designed to enforce existing federal law using the resources of the state.  it would be a different matter if the AZ law were in conflict with federal law, but it's not.


Furthermore, as many have pointed out, if the federal law really did have supremacy, then why not go after sanctuary city laws too?  They would be in the same conflict with federal law (or more so, since they directly oppose it), but none of them are being challenged.  And how can a state law conflict with a federal law when it says essentially the same thing, anyway?
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2010, 06:34:55 PM »

And then there is this at the end of section ten, but I do not know how it really applies. How do you define "invasion"?

Section 10 - Powers prohibited of States

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2010, 06:45:23 PM »

it seems to me that if people are coming from another country, entering your state, and doing harm, that ought to constitute and invasion. 

what if a UFO landed in AZ and a few thousand space aliens got off?  even if only some of them had bad intentions shouldn't AZ have the right to defend itself if the feds showed they were not interested?  after all, those space aliens might end up all over the country doing god knows what if they aren't stopped at the landing site.
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
hardwood
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3482


Location: Osteen, Fl (just south of Daytona)

Alysian Apiaries youtube.com/MrBeedude


« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2010, 06:50:54 PM »

One night this flying saucer came down and probed me!

The next morning, after sobering up, I realized I had backed into the satellite dish grin

Scott
Logged

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
cow pollinater
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 53

Location: Exeter, CA


« Reply #8 on: July 29, 2010, 07:20:20 PM »

We had some cattle rustling going on on a large dairy that I service.  I told everyone the cattle weren't really stolen, they were just abducted by illegal alliens. rolleyes
Logged

If it doesn't kill you it makes you stronger... Or maims you for life.
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2010, 07:20:47 PM »

Oh and I just realized, all this (earlier posting) was for LEGAL emigration. Anyone know what it says about ILLEGAL emigration?  rolleyes

Yeah... illegal. I know  rolleyes
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #10 on: July 29, 2010, 07:23:59 PM »

see what happens when you talk to yourself?  you start answering your own questions  evil  .
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2010, 10:53:49 AM »

see what happens when you talk to yourself?  you start answering your own questions  evil  .

 grin

Yeah but....

The question I was trying to get at was what does the federal  "uniform Rule of Naturalization" say about ILLEGAL emigrants?

 beat a dead horse I think that people keep missing the word ILLEGAL in all of it. And they are worried about "Racial Profiling". But if you are caught speeding and you have a valid driver's license and proof of insurance, I guess you wont be questioned further.  beat a dead horse
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8186

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2010, 02:48:02 PM »

If I go to some other country and get pulled over for speeding and I have no ID, where do you think they would put me?  With no passport, I am in the country illegally.   They would lock me up or deport me, or lock me up, then deport me in most countries.   Some countries I am sure take care of the infidels for good.
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2010, 02:55:58 PM »

We are not in another country, we are in the USA. Sorry.  tumbleweed
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15317


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2010, 06:03:10 PM »

but if you are here on a green card, student visa, etc. you are supposed to carry that info with you.  if you are stopped somewhere and all you have a ID from some other country, or no ID, it seems to me that it is perfectly reasonable for the LEO to ask for some ID that is from the US. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2010, 09:08:15 PM »

I think Kathyp and AllenF are the smart ones.  I would be in some Mexican prison somewhere forever!  Didn't you hear that country song playboy's of the southwestern world? By Blake Shelton
Logged
Jerrymac
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6047


Location: Wolfforth Texas


« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2010, 11:15:26 PM »

Who is Blake Shelton? I stopped listening to country when it stopped being country  grin
Logged

rainbow sunflower  Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.   rainbow sunflower

 Jerry

My pictures.Type in password;  youview
     http://photobucket.com/albums/v225/Jerry-mac/
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5526


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 31, 2010, 06:58:32 AM »

see what happens when you talk to yourself?  you start answering your own questions  evil  .

 grin

Yeah but....

The question I was trying to get at was what does the federal  "uniform Rule of Naturalization" say about ILLEGAL emigrants?

 beat a dead horse I think that people keep missing the word ILLEGAL in all of it. And they are worried about "Racial Profiling". But if you are caught speeding and you have a valid driver's license and proof of insurance, I guess you wont be questioned further.  beat a dead horse

 I guess we are back to the question of what the word IS is....,what a twisted world!
Logged
Keith13
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1817


Location: Baton Rouge, LA


« Reply #18 on: July 31, 2010, 07:56:29 AM »

The thing that steams me the most is, Arizona passed a law to protect its citizens because the federal govt. was not. The federals govt. then decides to go sue the state rather than support the state in protecting her CITIZENS. something just seems wrong about that

Keith
Logged
CountryBee
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 329


Location: Central, NY


« Reply #19 on: July 31, 2010, 08:04:49 AM »

Way to go Keith13!  you said it!  We keep helping everyone but our own..... angry
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.515 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page December 07, 2014, 08:37:36 AM
anything