saying the federal government clearly has no authority over
immigration and thus any Congress person who votes for any
immigration law is a crimnal. Still if we are going to go by orginal
meaning instead of orignal intent, we need to look carefully at all
the words in the clause, every single word, comma etc and how it
relates to the other words in the clause. Then go on and look at
other parts of the constitution especially the Bill of Rights
especially the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments, and add the 4th
when it comes to employers if they are citizens or other type of
legal residence, as well as other citizens or other type of legal
residence. The reason I waffle on the 4th is because many say the
people would not include non legal persons but even if that is so
the burden of proof is on the federal government to show that the
person is not legal. My post to H rearden brings out questions on the
meaning of the
words.
Jon Roland in another post brings out another interesting point
on the federal authority over immigration through The Laws Of Nations
clause but he also says best that I can tell this does not require an
employer to check ID. I need to study that clause and the argument a
bit more to see if can be
deconstrcuted.
Although the Constitution is a tool we can use, from a
libertarian political ethics point of view immigration is a rights
issue, a individual and property rights issue, other consederations
are
secondary.
Basically before 1880 the federal government did not exercise
much authority over immigration, it was seen mostly as a state and
local issue, the state of New York proceesed most of the immigrants
arriving on ship not the federal government until Congress authorized
more federal control and built Ellis island. So I wonder why
conservatives who so much encourage state and local governments to
take care of things are so willing to encorage federal power and
control over immigration, this includes Paleo Conservative
libertarians and Anarh/ CApitalist like Hans Hoope and one or two
others at Lew Rockwell and Mises who will go out of their way to
argue against the 14th amendment in favor of state authority, why in
the world do they want to concede authority over immigration to the
federal government, I just can't fiqure it out, what are they
thinking.
Yesterdays USA Todays front page had an interesting article about
The Sheriff's department in Chochise County, Ariz rriding hoseback
with ranchers on private property alone the border because some
crossing the border cause real problems, destroying property, being
violent, stealing etc. The Sheriff says the border patrol is a
failure, the deputies and others will find people then call the
border patrol and the federal employees will tell them they will be
there in a couple of hours. Chocise county has 83 deputies patroling
an area of rangeland, high deset and moutains larger than the state
of Conn. The Sheriff says he has testified before Congress 5 times
ranting about the crime, the cost to the justice system and the
strain on property owners but all he got was lip service, he views
both the Miutemen and the demonstrations as fruits of a Failed US
policy, he sees the Minuitemen project gainning momentum. In his 30
years of law enforcement he has learned if you don't do your job
somebody else will. Personally I think it is high time that people
stop counting on the federal government, organize locals and property
owners, work with property owners on the Mexican side but act justly,
forget about the federal government doing anything productive in this
matter they will only make things worse, they will gravate to one
extreme or the other and it is the citizens and legal residence of
this state that will get hurt. The high politicans and high
bureucrats are trying to spin this issue to consolidate their power
and many conservatives and some libertarians are trying to hand that
abusive power to them. Do we want national id cards, do we want a
wall on the borders which can keep us in as well as keep others out,
do we want employers and church members to go to prison for as much
as 10 years, do we want the IRS cracking down on businesses more, do
we want a standing federal Army on the border, will they stop at just
staying at the border or will they move inland patroling the Streets
of America asking for papers?--- In [email protected],
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Then there is a drift in meaning of some of the phases used in
this. It would never have occurred to me that Persons meant slaves.
And I am sure the same could be said about a lot of people.
>
> I am even less sure with the way words have shifted meaning that
the constitution is relevant today. This interpretation renders that
whole paragraph meaningless as there is no slavery allowed in the U.
S. anymore. It happened by default and not by amendment.
Interesting. And rather disturbing on some level.
>
> BWS
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Monday, May 1, 2006 6:38 pm
> Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Latino protesters made a huge public
relations mistake
>
> > Nice try. Naturalization is not immigration.
> >
> > Let's look at Article 1, section 9 which you attempted to use out
of
> > context...
> >
> > The migration or importation of such persons as any of the states
now
> > existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by
the
> > Congress prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight,
> > but a
> > tax or duty may be imposed on such importation, not exceeding ten
> > dollars for each person.
> >
> > This says the federal government can't prevent the states from
> > permitting any immigrants to they choose before 1808 but the fed
can
> > charge a DUTY of up to $10 per person. The word DUTY refers to
> > imports. In otherwords...SLAVES. If you're importing slaves,
> > Congress can charge up to $10 per head as a duty. Since slavery
has
> > since been outlawed, this clause is useless. It does not grant
the
> > federal government any authority over immigration.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], <boyd.w.smith@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Article I sections 8 and 9. 8 gives congress the duty to
establish
> > uniform Rule of Naturalization. Section 9 says that after 1808
> > congress can make laws on migration and importation of persons.
> > >
> > > BWS
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: terry12622000 <cottondrop@>
> > > Date: Monday, May 1, 2006 2:52 pm
> > > Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Latino protesters made a huge public
> > relations mistake
> > >
> > > > How are they illegal? Yes those that tresspass on private
> > property
> > > > and mess it up around the border are illegal and property
> > owners
> > > > have
> > > > a right to protect their property and persons and they have a
> > > > right
> > > > to join with their neighbors in protecting their property and
> > > > person,
> > > > plus request the Sheriff and local police department help.
> > That
> > > > being
> > > > said if they are not violating anyone's rights or attempting
> > to
> > > > then
> > > > how are they illegal. The constitution also does not give
> > > > authority
> > > > over immigration to the federal government, yeas if a state,
> > > > county
> > > > and locals request help in defending the borders the federal
> > > > government can help but it would be very unwise now to
> > encourage
> > > > the
> > > > federal government to come and park their employees( either
> > border
> > > > guards or a standing army) in the local area messing in
things
> > > > that
> > > > aint none of their business. I'm very disipointed at some of
> > my
> > > > fellow libertarians and some conservatives who should know
> > better
> > > > than to tempt the Central government with the request of help
> > and
> > > > the
> > > > grant of more power especially when it clearly is not needed.
> > Its
> > > > Congress breaking the law get that straight by passing
> > immigration
> > > > laws when they have no constitutional authority to do so,
they
> > are
> > > > going against their oath of office which is illegal. Some
> > states
> > > > may
> > > > have the constitutional authority over immigration if the
> > state
> > > > constitution says so.--- In [email protected], John
> > > > Perna
> > > > <savefreedom2005@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Latino protesters made a huge public relations mistake
> > > > >
> > > > > A small thought: "Do unto others as you would have them
do
> > > > unto
> > > > you."
> > > > > Who ever boycotts TODAY, WILL BE BOYCOTTED FOREVER.
> > > > > May first is a communist holiday.
> > > > > We are now seeing imported CLASS STRUGGLE.
> > > > >
> > > > > THE SOURCE OF THIS ARTICLE, Original URL, and AUTHOR
> > > > > CAN BE FOUND AT:
> > > > >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FreedomOfSpeechNow/message/73
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > THE CENSORED URL IS EMBEDDED THERE
> > > > > The message is being censored by the CAPCHA CENSORSHIP
> > PROGRAM.> > > I don't know how everybody else feels about it,
> > but to me I
> > > > think Hispanic people in this country, legally or illegally,
> > made
> > > > a
> > > > huge public relations mistake with their recent
demonstrations.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't blame anybody in the world for wanting to come
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > United States of America, as it is a truly wonderful place.
> > But
> > > > when
> > > > the first thing you do when you set foot on American soil is
> > > > illegal
> > > > it is flat out wrong and I don't care how many lala land left
> > > > heads
> > > > come out of the woodwork and start trying to give me
> > sensitivity
> > > > lessons.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't need sensitivity lessons, in fact I don't have
> > > > anything
> > > > against Mexicans! I just have something against criminals
and
> > > > anybody who comes into this country illegally is a criminal
> > and if
> > > > you don't believe it try coming into America from a foreign
> > > > country
> > > > without a passport and see how far you get. What disturbs me
> > > > about
> > > > the demonstrations is that it's tantamount to saying, "I am
> > going
> > > > to
> > > > come into your country even if it means breaking your laws
and
> > > > there's nothing you can do about it."
> > > > >
> > > > > It's an "in your face" action and speaking just for me I
> > > > don't
> > > > like it one little bit and if there were a half dozen pairs
of
> > > > gonads
> > > > in Washington bigger than English peas it wouldn't be
happening.
> > > > >
> > > > > Where are you, you bunch of lilly-livered, pantywaist,
> > > > forked
> > > > tongued, sorry excuses for defenders of The Constitution?
Have
> > you
> > > > been drinking the water out of the Potomac again?
> > > > >
> > > > > And even if you pass a bill on immigration it will
> > probably
> > > > be
> > > > so pork laden and watered down that it won't mean anything
> > anyway.
> > > > Besides, what good is an other law going to do when you won't
> > > > enforce
> > > > the ones on the books now?
> > > > >
> > > > > And what ever happened to the polls guys? I thought you
> > folks
> > > > were the quintessential finger wetters. Well you sure ain't
> > paying
> > > > any attention to the polls this time because somewhere around
> > > > eighty
> > > > percent of Americans want something done about this mess, and
> > mess
> > > > it
> > > > is and getting bigger everyday.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is no longer a problem, it is a dilemma and headed
> > for
> > > > being a tragedy. Do you honestly think that what happened in
> > > > France
> > > > with the Muslims can't happen here when the businesses who
> > hire
> > > > these
> > > > people finally run out of jobs and a few million
disillusioned
> > > > Hispanics take to the streets?
> > > > >
> > > > > If you, Mr. President, Congressmen and Senators,
knuckle
> > > > under
> > > > on this and refuse to do something meaningful it means that
> > you
> > > > care
> > > > nothing for the kind of country your children and
> > grandchildren
> > > > will
> > > > inherit.
> > > > >
> > > > > But I guess that doesn't matter as long as you get re-
> > > > elected.
> > > > Shame on you. One of the big problems in America today is
that
> > if
> > > > you
> > > > have the nerve to say anything derogatory about any group of
> > > > people
> > > > (except Christians) you are going to be screamed at by the
> > media
> > > > and
> > > > called a racist, a bigot and anything else they can think of
> > to
> > > > call
> > > > you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Well I've been pounded by the media before and I'm
still
> > > > rockin' and rollin' and when it comes to speaking the truth I
> > fear
> > > > not. And the truth is that the gutless, gonadless, milksop
> > > > politicians are just about to sell out the United States of
> > > > America
> > > > because they don't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > face reality.
> > > > >
> > > > > And reality is that we would never allow any other group
> > of
> > > > people to have 12 million illegals in this country and turn
> > around
> > > > and say, "Oh it's ok, ya'll can stay here if you'll just
allow
> > us
> > > > to
> > > > slap your wrist."
> > > > >
> > > > > And I know that some of you who read this column are
> > > > saying "Well what's wrong with that?"
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll tell you what's wrong with it. These people could
> > be
> > > > from
> > > > Mars as far as we know. We don't know who they are, where
they
> > are
> > > > or
> > > > what they're up to and the way the Congress is going we're
not
> > > > going
> > > > to.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does this make sense? Labor force you say? We already
> > > > subsidize
> > > > corporate agriculture as it is, must we subsidize their labor
> > as well?
> > > > >
> > > > > If these people were from Haiti would we be so fast to
> > turn a
> > > > blind eye to them or if they were from Somalia or
Afghanistan?
> > I
> > > > think not.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > All the media shows us are pictures of hard working
> > Hispanics
> > > > who have crossed the border just to try to better their life.
> > They
> > > > don't show you pictures of the Feds rounding up members of MS
> > 13,
> > > > the
> > > > violent gang who came across the same way the decent folks
> > did.
> > > > They
> > > > don't tell you about the living conditions of the Mexican
> > illegals
> > > > some fat cat hired to pick his crop.
> > > > >
> > > > > I want to make two predictions.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. 1: This situation is going to grow and fester until
> > it
> > > > erupts in violence on our streets while the wimps in
> > Washington
> > > > drag
> > > > their toes in the dirt and try to figure how many tons of
> > > > political
> > > > hay they can make to the acre.
> > > > >
> > > > > No 2: Somebody is going to cross that border with some
> > kind
> > > > of
> > > > weapon of mass destruction and set it off in a major American
> > city
> > > > after which there will be a backlash such as this country has
> > > > never
> > > > experienced and the Capitol building in Washington will
> > probably
> > > > tilt
> > > > as Congressmen and Senators rush to the other side of the
issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know about you but I would love to see just one
> > > > major
> > > > politician stand up and say, "I don't care who I make mad
and
> > I
> > > > don't care how many votes I lose, this is a desperate
> > situation
> > > > and
> > > > I'm going to lead the fight to get it straightened out"
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't blame anybody for wanting to come to America,
> > but if
> > > > you don't respect our immigration laws why should you respect
> > any
> > > > others. And by the way, this is America and our flag has
> > stars
> > > > and
> > > > stripes. Please get that other one out of my face.
> > > > >
> > > > > Pray for our troops
> > > > >
> > > > > God Bless America
> > > > >
> > > > > April 10, 2006
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > Get amazing travel prices for air and hotel in one click on
> > > > Yahoo!
> > > > FareChase
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for
> > ridiculously
> > > > low
> > > > rates.
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
SPONSORED LINKS
| Libertarian | English language | Political parties |
| Online dictionary | American politics |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
