Diamondbacks Bullpen Forum Index Diamondbacks Bullpen
The baseball forum that doesn't suck
 
 Home       News Feed 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Dave Zirin: Boycott the Arizona Diamondbacks
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Diamondbacks Bullpen Forum Index -> Anything Goes
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TAP
"Personality of a thumb-tack" - E Byrnes


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 25953

PostPosted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

xjwheelr wrote:
TAP wrote:
USA TODAY this evening wrote:
Led by Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, the chief legal officers of nine states and one U.S. territory just filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Arizona's controversial illegal immigration crackdown against a legal challenge by the Obama administration.

The brief was filed before a federal court in Arizona where a hearing on the federal suit has been scheduled for tomorrow.

Joining the Michigan brief: Florida, Alabama, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Virginia, Texas and the territory of the Northern Mariana Islands.

You can always count on Texas Very Happy

"If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this, saying that they had a major issue with, you know, with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would say, I would I would have to look twice at this. But this [Arizona] is a state that is a ways removed from the border."
- Milwaukee County Supervisor Peggy West explaining her "logic" in calling for a boycott of Arizona
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
YBC-Dog
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1884
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1070 Gets the first of many days in court...

Damn that Obama! Oh wait, it is a Latino Phoenix Police Officer who is suing, probably because he doesn't want to be forced under threat of lawsuit to racially profile other Hispanics.

Are White Supremacist organizations paying for the SB1070 legal fund? (C'mon, like we didn't already know this)
_________________
You're doing a heck of a job, Kenny!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
TAP
"Personality of a thumb-tack" - E Byrnes


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 25953

PostPosted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Selig: Arizona's SB 1070 is not a baseball issue
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
qudjy1
Number Retired


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 12060

PostPosted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looks seem apt to play role in enforcing Arizona immigration law

Quote:
Moments after signing Arizona's tough new immigration law in April, Gov. Jan Brewer was asked what an illegal immigrant looks like.

The question, posed during a news conference that was broadcast live on TV, seemed to catch Brewer off guard. After a long pause, she said, "I don't know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I can tell you that there are people in Arizona that assume they know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I don't know if they know that for a fact or not."

Her answer cut to the very heart of the controversy surrounding the law, which takes effect July 29. Although there are many people who assume they know what an illegal immigrant looks like, the fact is, it is impossible to tell a person's immigration status by appearance, experts say.



Quote:
The professors concluded that the law "authorizes racial profiling." On one hand, the law states that law-enforcement officers "may not consider race, color or national origin." But it also makes an exception to the extent those factors are permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution, she said. Federal and Arizona courts have ruled that ethnicity, when considered as one of many factors, can be used to enforce immigration laws, she said.

"Unfortunately, the constitutional standard we have is not a very high threshold for police to have," Hessick said. "And you are going to have an awful lot of false positives."

As a result, Hessick predicts, police will "sweep up an awful lot of people here who are legal residents, who are American citizens, and that is going to be a burden that is going to be disproportionately felt by a particular group here in Phoenix, and that is unfair."

_________________
Throw fucking strikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TAP
"Personality of a thumb-tack" - E Byrnes


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 25953

PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2010 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alia Beard Rau, Michael Kiefer and Kevin Kiley / The Arizona Republic this morning wrote:
The fate of Arizona's tough new immigration law now sits in the hands of U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton.

Bolton held hearings Thursday on two of the highest-profile legal challenges to Senate Bill 1070, making attorneys on both sides of the aisle sweat as she challenged their legal arguments and forced them to focus on specific portions of the law.

She didn't issue a ruling, and it is unknown when she will. But the clock is ticking toward next Thursday, when the law goes into effect.

Bolton did make one thing clear: She has no intention of invalidating the entire law but is considering halting the enactment of a handful of its 14 sections.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
qudjy1
Number Retired


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 12060

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/26/illegal-immigration-fingerprint-secure-communities_n_660140.html

Here is the next wave... Fingerprint databases.
_________________
Throw fucking strikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TAP
"Personality of a thumb-tack" - E Byrnes


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 25953

PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

John Nolte / bighollywood.com yesterday wrote:
Elton John didnít mince words in slamming his fellow musicians for boycotting Arizona over the controversial SB 1070 immigration law. From the stage at his sold-out Tucson Arena concert Thursday night, John savored a few choice, not-so-family-friendly words:

ďWe are all very pleased to be playing in Arizona. I have read that some of the artists wonít come here. They are (expletive) twits! Letís face it: I still play in California, and as a gay man I have no legal rights whatsoever. So whatís the (expletive) with these people?Ē

Whatís more rock and roll? Bono, Bruce and Stingís sanctimony or the Rocket Manís rebellious middle finger to liberal lock-step conformity?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DBWS08
Journeyman


Joined: 12 May 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Anywhere my laptop is allowed...

PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm boycotting the Diamondbacks, nothing to do with SB1070, but everything to do with this ownership group dumping salary and planning to cut back payroll. There is no way I'm going to spend my hard-earned money on a team that won't contend for years to come.
_________________
The cardiologist's diet: If it tastes good, spit it out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
YBC-Dog
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1884
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Judge strikes down all the racist parts of SB1070

You know I am shedding a tear about this.

Maybe Jan can start focusing on the bigger issues facing this state like the housing market and economy, instead of going after cleaning ladies and landscapers.

People are moving out of my neighborhood and it isn't because they are illegals. It is because they are completely underwater on their home and there is no end in sight for them to recoup their investment.

Quote:
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."

_________________
You're doing a heck of a job, Kenny!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Hank
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

YBC-Dog wrote:
Judge strikes down all the racist parts of SB1070

You know I am shedding a tear about this.

Maybe Jan can start focusing on the bigger issues facing this state like the housing market and economy, instead of going after cleaning ladies and landscapers.

People are moving out of my neighborhood and it isn't because they are illegals. It is because they are completely underwater on their home and there is no end in sight for them to recoup their investment.

Quote:
"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."


Struck down is very misleading. What she did was put enforcement of the statute on hold pending resolution of the merits of the case. The test for a preliminary injunction has historically required the party seeking one to show likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm. I have not read the decision, but the 9th Circuit, of which Arizona is a part, has been moving to a more liberal standard that requires a party seeking an injunction to show serious questions as to the merits and irreparable harm. The greater the harm the less strong the likelihood of success is now required. The irreparable harm seems to me to be pretty easy to show and pretty strong, so the judge may not have required much of a showing on the merits to put parts of the statute on hold. I think it is fair to read the decision as suggesting she will probably strike down the statute, but that is not necessarily what will happen, and she has merely put enforcement on hold for now.

The decision she made is appealable, so the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will now hear an appeal, and then the Supreme Court will surely be asked to get involved, but it will be discretionary with the Supreme Court as to whether they will. Given the liberal nature of the 9th Circuit, it is fairly likely that the injunction will be upheld on appeal. I wouldn't be surprised if the Supreme Court ducks and lets the case get decided on the merits before it decides to get involved.
_________________
2010 Gameday Thread Record: 1-0
2010 In Stadium Record: 4-5
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xjwheelr
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Posts: 1181

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you ok with the Federal government claiming that they and they alone reserve the right to enact "racist" enforcement of immigration laws?
_________________
"Mr. President...while I am impressed with your Renaissance Man-level of knowledge in a plethora of subjects, may I humbly say: Thatís great. Just fix the economy!Ē
- Jon Stewart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
YBC-Dog
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1884
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

xjwheelr wrote:
Are you ok with the Federal government claiming that they and they alone reserve the right to enact "racist" enforcement of immigration laws?


We've already went through this right here on this thread.

Show me where the words "where reasonable suspicion exists" as part of the federal immigration code.

You can't because it's not there.

And since you are going to come back with "but reasonable suspicion is part of law enforcement" then i respond with "then it should not need to be written explicitly into this law".

I hope they remove that language so this law will infringe on the rights of white people like it will latinos, so I can watch the libertarians in this state freak out and look like racist hypocrites.

She went after all of the parts of this law that I had a problem with and the parts that I thought were racist.

Good job, Judge Bolton.
_________________
You're doing a heck of a job, Kenny!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
moviegeekjn
Face of the Franchise


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 6829
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

YBC-Dog wrote:

Maybe Jan can start focusing on the bigger issues facing this state like the housing market and economy, instead of going after cleaning ladies and landscapers.


All Jan is going to focus on is getting re-elected... so railing against the legal decision is pretty much what we're going to hear. She's done the polling and campaigning on "this" issue gains more votes than dealing with bigger issues.
_________________
"the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
qudjy1
Number Retired


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 12060

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

YBC-Dog wrote:
Good job, Judge Bolton.


x2.
_________________
Throw fucking strikes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hank
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having now read snippets of the opinion, it appears that Judge Bolton did indeed decide that the federal government is likely to prevail on the merits. Thus, although the law has not been declared unconsitutional, she appears to have made it fairly clear that that is where she intends to go once the case is heard on the merits.

To some extent, she provided some guidance to the Legislature on how to amend the statute to get around some of her concerns, but she also seems to believe that the Fourth Amendment prohibits as much interference with lawful citizens and residents as this statute would permit. This particular line of reasoning may have a hard time surviving the current Supreme Court, which tends to be fairly pro government on any Fourth Amendment issue.
_________________
2010 Gameday Thread Record: 1-0
2010 In Stadium Record: 4-5
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
xjwheelr
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Posts: 1181

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

YBC-Dog wrote:
xjwheelr wrote:
Are you ok with the Federal government claiming that they and they alone reserve the right to enact "racist" enforcement of immigration laws?


We've already went through this right here on this thread.

Show me where the words "where reasonable suspicion exists" as part of the federal immigration code.

You can't because it's not there.

Good job, Judge Bolton.


I was just referring to Bolton's own words:

"By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."

It sounds to me like she is saying that it's the Federal Government's job to impose extraordinary burdens on legal residents.

Here' the problem/confusion I have: either it's a racial issue, or it's a Supremacy issue. It sounds like a lot of detractors are saying, effectively, "this is a racist law: it's the Federal Government's job to enforce immigration." It's a non sequitor.
_________________
"Mr. President...while I am impressed with your Renaissance Man-level of knowledge in a plethora of subjects, may I humbly say: Thatís great. Just fix the economy!Ē
- Jon Stewart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
YBC-Dog
Veteran Presence


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 1884
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It can't be both racist and a violation of the supremacy clause?

That is how I see the law.

I could truthfully care less about the supremacy clause side of things. My concern is the racial side of thing and Arizona enforcing a law based on race.
_________________
You're doing a heck of a job, Kenny!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
dirtygary
Hall of Famer


Joined: 11 Aug 2006
Posts: 4760
Location: Phoenix

PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AZ Republic wrote:
"The decision is very disappointing," Kavanagh said. "Those were major parts of the law that helped us battle illegal immigration. I assume that we will immediately appeal to the 9th Circuit (Court of Appeals)."

Kavanagh said that the state remained committed to defending the law and seeing it enacted. "This is only the start of the legal battle."

The only winners are the lawyers.
_________________
Lute.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Justin
Face of the Franchise


Joined: 14 Dec 2007
Posts: 8878
Location: Marana

PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.kold.com/Global/story.asp?S=12896093
_________________
Per Mare, Per Terras
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GowMI4wvmU4&feature=related
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address
levski
Number Retired


Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 17727

PostPosted: Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

YBC-Dog wrote:
Judge strikes down all the racist parts of SB1070


Huh. I'm shocked. I really didn't see this coming... /snark
_________________
"Those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first call promising." Cyril Connolly, 'Enemies of Promise'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Diamondbacks Bullpen Forum Index -> Anything Goes All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30
Page 30 of 30

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



visitors since April 13, 2006.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group