Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Law Punishing.  
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8910 posts, RR: 10
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1741 times:

I have no link I recieved an email update saying the US Supreme Court upheld the Arizona law punishing business's who hire illegal aliens. Has anyone else seen this? I was surprised it is not on here.


It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1732 times:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/26/scotus.arizona.law/index.html

Here is a link. A good ruling in my opinion, it is about time something is upheld in court about business hiring illegals. Progress at last.

[Edited 2011-05-26 18:33:11]


It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently onlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Now if we can just do the same to the sanctuary cities we may be on to something.

[Edited 2011-05-26 18:37:48]

User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1719 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 2):
No if we can just do the same to the sanctuary cities we may be on to something.

I agree, it is another giant problem, ignored as usual.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1702 times:

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 1):
it is about time something is upheld in court about business hiring illegals.



The key to the opinion is that the Arizona authorities cannot say who is legal and who is illegal.

The ruling only allows Arizona to rescind business licenses for those businesses which do not follow FEDERAL REGULATIONS to verify employment eligibility - the E-Verify system. Only when a company does not use E-Verify or hires someone which E-Verify says is illegal - can Arizona take action.

The Arizona law does not allow authorities to go into a business which does not require a state license and check for illegals.

We have plenty of laws and legal authority to punish businesses which hire illegals. The problem in my opinion is two fold.

1) Big business does not get charged when illegal workers are found. Individuals are not held responsible, not plant or store managers, not hiring managers. If the ICE folks start arresting and charging the WalMart manager, the packing plant manager, you will see illegals stop being hired.

2) The laws allow companies to avoid responsibility for illegals by hiring 'contractors' to do the actual work. The illegals cleaning the floors at WalMart are usually hired and paid by a contractor company. That company is the one 'responsible' not WalMart which setup the system to lower costs.

Make no mistake, big business, and the politicians which they support, do not want actual enforcement to stop the supply of cheap illegal workers.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1689 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 4):

I agree, there are problay tons of loopholes in the law, but the principle has been advanced by this ruling. The principle that a state may pass a law affecting illegal alien workers, and it is Constitutional. I agree with that. Let us hope the state enforces it to the best of their ability. Business is the big Villan, no doubt about it.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13116 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1674 times:

In the USA, licensing of businesses is handled by the individual states and municipalities, not by the Federal government. A state can set standards of meeting State and Federal laws and rules to retain a business license or have it revoked or not renewed as well as to it being incorporated, an LLC or LP or proprietorship or a registered business in the state.

I would have to read the Arizona law and USSC decision as to how they could use the hiring of illegals to take action, if they would have to wait for a Federal ICE action/conviction before the state could take action, or state authorities using tips could investigate on the licensee's or corporation's business offices if they have prepared legal Federal I-9's and did the proper checks for legal resident or USA Citizenship status. The main target of this law were the 1000's of generally small businesses like building contractors who have to have a license to do such business and had high rates of the use of non-USA legal residents or citizens for staffing.

Still, this is not an unreasonable law or USSC decision. If properly used, it can protect companies that follow the law and not be disadvantaged by those using cheaper lower wage and illegal workers, as well as protect illegal workers from exploitation and consumers from supporting illegal immigration. It does not interfere with the exclusive Federal authority as to determination of legal residency or citizenship which is why the Court decided in favor of the state of Arizona.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1588 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 4):
Make no mistake, big business, and the politicians which they support, do not want actual enforcement to stop the supply of cheap illegal workers.

What suprised me a little bit was that the U.S. Chamber was opposed to this law...only proves that illegal immigration is the Republicans dirty little secret.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1582 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 7):
What suprised me a little bit was that the U.S. Chamber was opposed to this law...only proves that illegal immigration is the Republicans dirty little secret.

Excuse me? It was the Obama administration that was opposed to this law and argued so to the court. And the law was pushed through by Republicans.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinedoclightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19727 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1574 times:

I can't see how this law was challenged.

The "show your papers" bit and the denying birth certificates bit is a clear violation of the Constitution. Demanding that businesses not use illegals is not.


User currently offlineWN738 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 153 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1563 times:

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 1):
Here is a link. A good ruling in my opinion, it is about time something is upheld in court about business hiring illegals. Progress at last.
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 1):
Now if we can just do the same to the sanctuary cities we may be on to something.

   Take away the demand, and we will finally be able to control our borders and prevent the rampant increase in illegal immigration. Why come to the USA illegally if you cant get a job. Hopefully it will be enforced very strictly, though some how i doubt that, unfortunately  
Quoting doclightning (Reply 9):
The "show your papers" bit and the denying birth certificates bit is a clear violation of the Constitution. Demanding that businesses not use illegals is not.

Um...NO. Not until the Supreme Court says so. I zalmost guarantee you that law will be up next. I dont feel it is unconstitutional, and i'm keeping my fingers crossed that the Supreme Court also doesnt say its unconstitutional  crossfingers 

[Edited 2011-05-27 17:08:58]

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1504 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 8):
And the law was pushed through by Republicans.

See? The Republicans can be anti-business and anti-free market when they want to be.  
Quoting WN738 (Reply 10):
I dont feel it is unconstitutional, and i'm keeping my fingers crossed that the Supreme Court also doesnt say its unconstitutional

Oh, it's definitely unconstitutional.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1503 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 11):

See? The Republicans can be anti-business and anti-free market when they want to be.

So by your logic Republicans should be pro-mafia, pro-drug trade? After all, it's just business.

Quoting Mir (Reply 11):
Oh, it's definitely unconstitutional.

Right, enforcing immigration law is soooo unconstitutional.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):

Right, enforcing immigration law is soooo unconstitutional.

Please point to the law which says children born in the US, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are to be denied birth certificates because of the parent's immigration status?

Because I have a Constitutional amendment which would invalidate that law as well.

As far as "showing your papers"... if you cannot approach a US citizen to ask for proof of their citizenship, you cannot approach anyone, because you don't know if they're a citizen or not. There is literally no way of determining suspicion of illegality outside of a) checking someone's ID or b) profiling based on skin color or language skills (which violates the 14th Amendment). You cannot stop someone for an ID check unless there's probable cause for such a stop.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):
So by your logic Republicans should be pro-mafia, pro-drug trade? After all, it's just business.

I have no problem with this particular law, I just find it ironic.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):
Right, enforcing immigration law is soooo unconstitutional.

Depends on how it's done.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1490 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 14):

Depends on how it's done.

Businesses are audited all the time, for health and safety inspections, tax audits, SEC audits and so on. The state has a right, within reason, to ensure that businesses operate within the rules. One of the primary purposes of government is ensuring that everyone plays by the same rules and nobody takes unfair advantage - such as avoiding statutory labor costs that other companies must pay.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1476 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 15):
Businesses are audited all the time, for health and safety inspections, tax audits, SEC audits and so on. The state has a right, within reason, to ensure that businesses operate within the rules. One of the primary purposes of government is ensuring that everyone plays by the same rules and nobody takes unfair advantage - such as avoiding statutory labor costs that other companies must pay.

Just to be clear, I have no problem with that particular law, even though it is an extra hoop of regulation that businesses have to jump through, and it will likely increase costs to consumers in certain sectors. What I'm not a fan of is the law that allows police to check the papers of those who they suspect of being illegal - that I believe will be ruled unconstitutional. And as far as the whole denying birth certificates thing, that's clearly unconstitutional.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineWN738 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 153 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1458 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 16):
And as far as the whole denying birth certificates thing, that's clearly unconstitutional.
Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 13):
Please point to the law which says children born in the US, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are to be denied birth certificates because of the parent's immigration status?


Both of you and i both know that the Constitution and the amendment you refer two were NEVER intended to protect and reward the children of criminals, which is what illegal immigrants are. they were ment to protect newly freed slaves. I dont think the Supreme Court would rule this law unconstitutional because some liberals who dont believe we have the right to control immigration want to pervert the amendment.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 1446 times:

BTW, the Supreme Court voted 5-3 (Kagan recused herself) in favor of Arizona so apparently it is constitutional.


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 31
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1421 times:

Quoting WN738 (Reply 17):
Both of you and i both know that the Constitution and the amendment you refer two were NEVER intended to protect and reward the children of criminals, which is what illegal immigrants are. they were ment to protect newly freed slaves. I dont think the Supreme Court would rule this law unconstitutional because some liberals who dont believe we have the right to control immigration want to pervert the amendment.

Not picking on you individually, just using your quote as a summary of a generally held opinion.

This the problem why Republicans do not want immigrantion properly controlled and the incentive for illegal immigration removed.

They are too concerned with punishing criminals and not concerned at all with actually doing something to fix the problem.

To remove the current illegals in the US would result huge and significant changes in our economy, mostly very negative in the short term. States and cities would lose billions in tax revenue from sales taxes and property taxes of apartments and rentals illegals use. Some businesses such as production of beef and pork for our supermarkets would mostly shut down.

Much of our agricultural food production would have to shift overseas because our farmers would be unable to find and hire the workers they need to grow and harvest the crops.

Our housing industry would come close to a stop of new home building, and all the backlash through the supply system.

Something as simple as going out for fast food would become difficult, as many places would be shuttered due to lack of labor, and those remaining open would increase prices significantly to pay for the new hires.

American citizens are not going to rush out by the millions to take below minimum wage jobs picking beans, shoveling dirt on construction sites, washing dishes at McDonalds.

One point I always agreed with former President Bush upon - they are here, they are not leaving, we cannot afford to have them leave.

First step - Find a way to make them legal !!!!!

If you want to holler "It's amnesty" fine - just put up or shut up. Go out and get that job picking lettuce in California.

Second step - Enact measures to ensure illegals cannot be hired and punish the business owners signficantly - jail time.

Most conservatives and liberals don't like any system to ensure illegals cannot be hired. They both hate the idea of a unified system which will quickly confirm everyones identity. A national identity card is hated by both sides of the aisle. People rightly fear the potential of abuse of a system which links all your records, state, local and federal into one database. And the resultant errors which would certainly occur for a miniscule percentage would make their lives hell.

(Though of course this would also end the identity theft problem in this nation very quickly. On the other hand, the IRS is really going to be able to track you and your earnings much better.)

But without some such system - there is always going to be ways for illegals to work and to be paid.

If we can remove the jobs, the illegals will stop coming.

They come to this country because everyone in the world knows there are no real penalties, for either the illegal or the employer, for working illegally in this country.

But putting penalties on the tiny number of illegals caught is not going to do anything to solve the problem.


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 4):
Make no mistake, big business, and the politicians which they support, do not want actual enforcement to stop the supply of cheap illegal workers.



Well you should do a little more home work and check into Raul Grijalva (D) ...Rejhna Romero (D) and the other Hispanic legislature in our district. Believe me ..they do not support anti illegal worker laws of any kind .

Things are changing though .... sorry but when I see 2 or 3 white guys on a roofing crew that is amazing around here. ! I was shocked . I hired a roofing company last month and I grilled that man over their policy of employment ... he told me they do not hire illegals and they check everyone.

But here is how it works ... their are "slave traders " operating here . They are Mexican owned business (contractors) who sub contract labor to landscaping companies , roofers , construction outfits. I have seen them ... they show up when the job is done and pay cash to the guys (illegals) who worked. The prime contractor wipes their hands because all they did was subcontract out to a smaller operator. Their is no way to trace it unless ICE goes to the job sight .... the subcontractor does not keep records of who was on the job ..or they simply put some legal guys on the record and hand it to the prime contractor . See you can make any law you want ...but it is not going to stop it unless we the people make it happen.



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineWN738 From United States of America, joined Apr 2011, 153 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 1362 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 19):
To remove the current illegals in the US would result huge and significant changes in our economy, mostly very negative in the short term

So be it then. I see no reason why they should be rewarded for ignoring US law, and coming to the USA as if they were entitled to US citizenship just because they think they should

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 19):
One point I always agreed with former President Bush upon - they are here, they are not leaving, we cannot afford to have them leave

So essentially they have forced their way here, disrespecting the USA, and the law, and we just have to live with it, because they are too entrenched to go? I dont buy it. Id rather have our economy collapse than continue to see the supply of drug dealers and gang bangers or of parents who produce gang bangers continue to increase. Tough times calls for tough measures. Its like quiting smoking; the USA and the liberals by accepting these criminals out of convenience KNEW there would be a problem down the road, now we should just live with the consequences of removing them, or put up with the destruction of anglo-american culture and perpetually increasing crime rates. I think taking a hit to the economy is better.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 19):
First step - Find a way to make them legal !!!!!

So reward them for ignoring the law, and encourage their arrogant revanchist attitude that they are entitled to come to the USA and get citizenship just because they show up. right... No thanks. I will fight to the death any attempts to do so with my vote, despite the fact one vote doesn't count.

[Edited 2011-05-28 13:07:03]

User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 1331 times:

Quoting WN738 (Reply 21):
Id rather have our economy collapse than continue to see the supply of drug dealers and gang bangers or of parents who produce gang bangers continue to increase.

You really wouldn't.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 8910 posts, RR: 10
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1307 times:

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 20):
Things are changing though .... sorry but when I see 2 or 3 white guys on a roofing crew that is amazing around here. ! I was shocked . I hired a roofing company last month and I grilled that man over their policy of employment ... he told me they do not hire illegals and they check everyone.


Good for you, we need more of that. I just had a roof put on myself, a couple of months ago, so did my son, this month. Every worker on both jobs was above reproach, it is not hard to do. It just take a little concern for your fellow citizens, and the knowledge that you are part of the illegal immigrant problem, by hiring men,women who are illegal, all for a buck.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineGeezer From United States of America, joined Aug 2010, 1479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1283 times:

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 19):
American citizens are not going to rush out by the millions to take below minimum wage jobs picking beans, shoveling dirt on construction sites, washing dishes at McDonalds.

I haven't seen anyone "shoveling dirt" at a construction site ( or anyplace else ) since the tool rental places started renting "mini" backhoes !

And "washing dishes" at McDonald's ? What McDonald's are you going to, that have dishes ?


[quote=WN738,reply=21]So essentially they have forced their way here, disrespecting the USA, and the law, and we just have to live with it, because they are too entrenched to go? I dont buy it. Id rather have our economy collapse than continue to see the supply of drug dealers and gang bangers or of parents who produce gang bangers continue to increase. Tough times calls for tough measures. Its like quiting smoking; the USA and the liberals by accepting these criminals out of convenience KNEW there would be a problem down the road, now we should just live with the consequences of removing them, or put up with the destruction of anglo-american culture and perpetually increasing crime rates. I think taking a hit to the economy is better.


You're a great American, WN738 ! It's "refreshing" to finally see someone who realizes what this whole mass influx of foreign criminals is doing to this country.
Here's something that no one ever seems to "talk about, or "worry about" on here; all we ever hear about is illegals from Mexico, Central and South American countries "sneaking" into the U.S., and all of the reasons why we "need" them so, can't "do without them", etc............................

Now, let's talk about a few hundred thousand Americans "sneaking" into Mexico, and see how far they get ! Their "illegal immigration" laws are tougher than some of the Eastern Bloc countries, during the "cold war" !
Even if you move to Mexico legally, you can't "run for public office", you can't collect "entitlements" from their "system", so to be perfectly frank about it, they run THEIR country THEIR way, but they think WE should run OUR country THEIR way !

You know, there are a lot more "sides" to this problem than most people even realize; if any American Citizen, (particularly a WHITE AMERICAN CITIZEN) even voices an "opinion" about "illegal immigration", you are instantly called a "racist"; yet when hundreds of thousands of 'illegals" from Mexico ( and Central and South American countries) come to the U.S., WE are supposed to teach THEIR language in OUR SCHOOLS, put up road and street signs in SPANISH, (as they can't be "bothered" with learning ENGLISH ! )
What's wrong with this "picture" folks ?

Here's something else many "on here" are unaware of: much of South Texas, from Brownsville, Harlingen, Weslaco, Mc Allen, all the way up to Kingsville, is populated largely by Americans of Mexican "decent" ; some were born in Mexico, but most were born in the U.S. They ALL speak Spanish ( because it's their "mother tongue" ), but they also all speak ENGLISH every bit as well as I do ! ( because they are American Citizens ! ) They regard "America" as THEIR COUNTRY ! Many work for the U.S. Government, ( Border Patrol, Dept. of Agriculture, etc.) I had a most "unusual opportunity" several years ago to go to a big wedding that was held on South Padre Island, Texas. There were maybe 300 people at "The Event"; The only "white people" at this wedding were myself, the "groom", and his mother, brother, and sister; everyone else was............."Mexican-American"; I can honestly say, it was the first wedding I have ever been to, that I really "enjoyed" myself ! ( for several reasons ) It is rather common for people of vastly different cultures to feel "uneasy", "sceptical", etc. of one another. In this case, we all became great friends ! And because this marriage has become such a huge success in the ensuing two years, we have all become even better friends. It has all given me a "rare glimpse" at both side of the "cultural thing". Guess what ? a very large "majority" of these people "got here" the "old fashioned" way..........LEGALLY ! And they tend to feel that everyone else should "do it that way" also !

At the end of the day, I suppose this is far too big of an issue to ever hope to "speak meaningfully" about on a forum.
I can tell anyone this however..........knowing people, having friends, etc, on both sides of an "issue" definitely gives one a better "perspective" on that issue.

Charley



Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
25 Post contains images WN738 : That's is EXACTLY why the Arizona law regarding checking papers, should also be held constitutional. Giving amnesty to these criminals, is basically
26 Mir : Not checking papers does not equal amnesty. How can you be a criminal the moment you're born? -Mir
27 Geezer : Yes, I am very familiar with "La Raza" ; that's the "group" who thinks that all of Arizona and Texas should be "deeded over" to Mexico. Wonder how th
28 Mir : What the two of you fail to understand is that the 14th amendment (or at least the specific part of the 14th amendment that deals with citizenship) d
29 mt99 : What year did she come? How did she qualify? How long did the process take? Legal immigration has gotten harder thru the years, so your claim need to
30 Geezer : Mir; First, let's get a few "facts" straight; there are a lot of things that I fail to understand...................the 14th amendment to the U.S. Co
31 gemuser : In this country you can! A child born in Australia of TWO illegal immigrants is an illegal immigrant and subject to immediate deportation. And yes it
32 Mir : See, I tend to believe that in order to be a criminal, you have to do something to deserve it. Steal money, hurt someone, or even cross a border you'
33 mt99 : That is the stuff that make the "USA" the "USA". Thats the stuff that makes the USA the greatest country. Funny, how some who fight to "our ways" are
34 Dreadnought : We are talking about deportation to the country where you belong - not being thrown in prison.
35 Post contains images WN738 : Why should they benefirt frokm a criminal act? What message does that send to the illegals? its okay to come here because we arent going to enforce o
36 Mir : What did the kid do to deserve being deported? Did they have any say in the matter? Did they say "please make sure you're in the US when I come out o
37 DocLightning : In fact, that's EXACTLY what it's there for. It is unconstitutional to punish a child for crimes committed by parents. I agree that the Constitution
38 WN738 : Actually thats not that bad of an idea. I STILL dont like them staying here benefiting from a criminal act, but perhaps if we did as you suggest, les
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Justice Souter Retiring From US Supreme Court posted Thu Apr 30 2009 19:07:31 by LTBEWR
US Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg Hospitalized posted Thu Feb 5 2009 10:14:51 by JetBlueGuy2006
US Supreme Court To Hear DC Gun Ban Case posted Tue Nov 20 2007 12:45:12 by D L X
US Supreme Court Reviews The PIT posted Mon Feb 26 2007 18:36:53 by MDorBust
Atheist Fares Poorly With US Supreme Court posted Thu Mar 25 2004 02:13:26 by EA CO AS
US Supreme Court To Decide Mandatory ID Case posted Tue Mar 23 2004 01:14:34 by Jhooper
Breaking NEWS: US Supreme Court Overruled! posted Wed Dec 20 2000 07:44:37 by D L X
US Supreme Court Reverses FL Court posted Wed Dec 13 2000 04:15:39 by Sccutler
Supreme Court To Decide Photo ID Voting Law posted Tue Sep 25 2007 23:03:45 by Cfalk
Supreme Court Hearing Arguments On Abortion Law posted Thu Nov 9 2006 15:30:18 by AerospaceFan