Between Federally owned land and Illegals in Arizona Dem's will do all they can for the Latino Vote.

Arizona House votes to demand return of federally owned lands

PHOENIX (Reuters) - Arizona lawmakers on Monday passed legislation demanding the U.S.government relinquish to the state millions of acres of federal territory, in the latest rekindling of a "sagebrush rebellion" over control of public lands in the West.

Without debate, the Republican-dominated Arizona House of Representatives easily passed a measure seeking the return of roughly 48,000 square miles of government-owned acreage in the Grand Canyon state by 2015.

The bill, approved on a 35-15 vote, now goes to the state Senate for final passage. Republican Governor Jan Brewer would then have five days once the bill reaches her desk to sign or veto it. Otherwise, the measure becomes law automatically.

Arizona would be the second state in the nation to enact such legislation. Last month, Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed a bill seeking to reclaim some 30 million acres of federally owned land in his state, shrugging off warnings from state attorneys that the measure was likely unconstitutional and would lead to a protracted yet futile legal battle.

The moves cap years of rising indignation among political conservatives in big Western states over that fact that vast tracts of their land mass are owned by various federal agencies, much of it by the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management. In Arizona, the U.S. government controls 42 percent of the land mass, compared with some 60 percent in Utah.

Proponents of the Arizona bill have complained that federal control puts too much land off-limits to commercial development such as mining, logging and livestock raising -- limiting the state's potential tax base for schools and other public services.

They see the government as too closely aligned with environmental groups, which largely oppose efforts by the so-called sagebrush rebels to loosen federal controls. Conservationists say less federal management would lead to degradation of the land and its wildlife while allowing a virtual giveaway of publicly owned natural resources.

"All of these federal agencies have been infiltrated by extreme environmentalists and have almost killed off what Arizona was built on - lumber, mining and ranching," said Republican state Senator Al Melvin, the bill's chief sponsor. "It's wrong and it's happening all over the West. We are bound and determined to put it to an end to this."

Under the bill, the state would seek title to most of the state's federal acreage, including national monuments, national forests and national wildlife refuges. Military bases and national parks would be exempt, as would Indian reservations.

Arizona’s illegal-immigration law heads to Supreme Court. Will justices strike it down?

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the country's toughest illegal-immigration bill into law two years ago, setting off a long legal battle with the Obama administration and inspiring half a dozen states to emulate Arizona and pass similar laws. On Wednesday, the federal government and Arizona will face off at the Supreme Court, where Justice Department lawyers will try to convince the court that the law is an unconstitutional invasion into the federal government's turf.

A federal judge blocked four major aspects of the law before they ever went into effect, including the provision that local police officers check the immigration status of people during stops if they have reason to suspect they lack legal status. Provisions making it a state crime for illegal immigrants to seek work, or for any immigrant to fail to carry immigration papers, were also blocked. Last year, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court's decision and shot down most of the law.

Although public opinion polls showed that most Americans supported the law's provisions after it passed, the minority opposition was passionate, and it set off a national debate about illegal immigration that has permeated the presidential elections. Opponents argued that the law would encourage racial profiling and branded Arizona the "show me your papers" state. More than 100 different parties, including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and dozens of states, have filed friend-of-the-court briefs weighing in on the law.

Three interesting twists are likely to make this case even more high-profile—and political—than it already has been. First of all, Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates for the presidency have blasted the Obama administration for suing Arizona in the first place, using it as a way to paint the president as soft on illegal immigration and intrusive on states' rights. Secondly, a familiar face will represent Arizona's case: Paul Clement, the lawyer who argued against Obama's health care law before the Supreme Court earlier this month, will once again take center stage. Lastly, Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself from the case because she was solicitor general when the government first filed suit against Arizona.

Democrats plan to force vote on Arizona immigration law if it’s upheld by court

Senate Democrats are making plans to force a floor vote on legislation that would invalidate Arizona’s controversial immigration statute if the Supreme Court upholds the law this summer.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) will announce the fallback legislation at a hearing on the Arizona law Tuesday, a day before the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a suit to determine whether Arizona had the authority to enact the 2010 state crackdown.

The legislation would have little chance of passing in a stalemated Senate or being approved by a GOP-held House, but it would allow Democrats to push their electoral advantage with Latino voters just as the presidential campaign heats up in July.

The plan is to allow Democrats a route to express displeasure with the Arizona law if the court allows it to stand, and it would force Republicans to take a clear position on the law during the height of the presidential campaign. The immigration law is deeply unpopular with Latino voters,

“If the court upholds the Arizona law, Congress can make it clear that what Arizona is doing goes beyond what the federal government and what Congress ever intended,” Schumer said in an interview.

He called the Arizona law an “assault on the domain of the federal government” that Congress will need to address if the court allows it to stand.

U.S. Supreme Court immigration case weighs states' powers

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A clash over immigration law will go before the U.S. Supreme Court this week, pitting the state ofArizona against President Barack Obama in a case with election-year political ramifications for him and Republican rival Mitt Romney.

In its second-biggest case this term, the court - fresh from hearing the Obama healthcare overhaul case - will consider on Wednesday whether a tough Arizona immigration crackdown strayed too far into the federal government's powers.

A pro-Arizona decision would be a legal and political setback for Obama, who has criticized the state's law and vowed to push for immigration legislation if re-elected on November 6.

A decision against Arizona would deal a blow to Romney, who has said the government should drop its challenge to the law.

Americans generally support immigration laws like Arizona's and are ambivalent about the federal and state roles at the core of the case, a new Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll found.

About 70 percent of those surveyed favored state laws that let police check a person's immigration status and make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to work in the United States; about 30 percent opposed such measures.  

thank you  battleskin88

Time for a Military Approach to the Border

There are many types of fences on the border.  In Douglas, Arizona Border Patrol has recently finished building a new 18-foot-high fence.  It covers six miles of border, is made of much tougher steel which is harder to cut, and sinks about six feet into the ground to make it harder to tunnel.  The ranchers are skeptical if this fence will do the job and cite Janet Napolitano’s 2005 statement (when governor) that “[y]ou show me a 50-foot wall and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder.”  Warner and Kelly, whose ranch is close to the border, discouragingly stated, “After this fence was built, the illegal immigrants were coming up and over.  It seems that the cartels will find ways around anything built.”  There is also the fear that a tougher fence could push the smugglers into the rural areas where many of the ranchers reside.

thank you Harry, The NSM and Everyone else protecting Our Borders!  shera~

Immigration officials arrest more than 3,100

Federal officials say they arrested more than 3,100 immigrants convicted of serious crimes and fugitives in a six-day nationwide sweep. (April 2, 2012)

More than 2,900 convicted criminal immigrants arrested, ICE says Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Washington (CNN) — In a huge, seven-day operation covering all 50 states and four U.S. territories, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials arrested 2,901 convicted criminal immigrants as part of the “Cross Check” enforcement operation, ICE officials announced Wednesday.
-
ICE officials trumpeted the arrests at a news conference designed to highlight “the Obama administration’s ongoing commitment to prioritizing the removal of criminal aliens and egregious immigration law violators.”
-
ICE Director John Morton said all those arrested had prior criminal convictions, including 1,282 who had multiple convictions. More than 1,600 of those arrested had felony convictions including manslaughter, attempted murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, drug trafficking, child abuse, sexual crimes against minors and aggravated assault. Forty-two of them were gang members and 151 were convicted sex offenders, officials said.
-
ICE officials acknowledged that despite the large number of arrests, there were still an estimated 1 million convicted criminal aliens in the United States. Morton said one of the issues ICE is trying to deal with is the lack of notification to immigration authorities when offenders are released from jail.
Most of the people detained — 2,642 — were men. Those arrested came from 115 countries, with immigration fugitives accounting for 681 of those detained in the operation, Morton said. Of the people arrested, 386 were illegal re-entrants.

High Court Upholds Arizona Law Penalizing Employers Over Illegal Immigrant Workers

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona's law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Thursday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

he decision upholding the validity of the 2007 law comes as the state is appealing a ruling that blocked key components of a second, more controversial Arizona immigration enforcement law. Thursday's decision applies only to business licenses and does not signal how the high court might rule if the other law comes before it.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a majority made up of Republican-appointed justices, said the Arizona's employer sanctions law "falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states."

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, all Democratic appointees, dissented. The fourth Democratic appointee, Justice Elena Kagan, did not participate in the case because she worked on it while serving as President Barack Obama's solicitor general

Breyer said the Arizona law upsets a balance in federal law between dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers and ensuring that people are not discriminated against because they may speak with an accent or look like they might be immigrants.

Employers "will hesitate to hire those they fear will turn out to lack the right to work in the United States," he said.

Business interests and civil liberties groups challenged the law, backed by the Obama administration.

The measure was signed into law in 2007 by Democrat Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona and now the administration's Homeland Security secretary.

The employer sanctions law has been only infrequently used. It was intended to diminish Arizona's role as the nation's hub for immigrant smuggling by requiring employers to verify the eligibility of new workers through a federal database. more

thank you Kev

Fed. Appeals court talks of axing part of Arizona law

 

ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations

Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) enforces the nation’s immigration laws in a fair and effective manner. It identifies and apprehends removable aliens, detains these individuals when necessary and removes illegal aliens from the U.S. This unit prioritizes the apprehension, arrest and removal of convicted criminals, those who pose a threat to national security, fugitives and recent border entrants.

– Arizona’s immigration law faced tough scrutiny from a federal appeals panel Monday as the state’s governor appeared in person to support the controversial provision on the day before the election in which she’s seeking her first full term.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals signaled it was ready to toss out the provision of Arizona’s law that criminalizes the failure to carry immigration papers showing lawful residency in the United States.
But the three-judge panel didn’t tip its hand over which way it was leaning on other provisions of the state law that touched off a national furor
U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler argued Monday that the provisions in question violate laws making immigration enforcement the exclusive domain of the federal government.
Among the provisions at issue is the requirement that police — when enforcing other laws — must question the immigration status of people they have reason to suspect are in the country illegally.

“It’s how the state wants to use its people,” said Judge Carlos Bea, appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush. “The state can turn over an illegal to federal officials.”

Perhaps  Governor Brewer, Arizona Law enforcement     could turn over the ‘illegals’ to I.C.E. if they would stand by there motto/creed:

“United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Our mission is to protect national security by enforcing our nation’s customs and immigration laws”
I.C.E. should be at home doing the job that the American Tax Payers Pay them for by protecting the borders  or deporting those that have been detained instead of helping Earthquake Victims of Haiti? shera~

Kneedler responded that requiring local law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of everyone they suspect as being an illegal immigrant takes away from their investigatory discretion. He also said the law intrudes upon foreign policy and diplomacy, areas that are left for the federal government.
“If every state did this, we would have a patchwork of law,” Kneedler said.
Arizona’s legislature passed the law after years of complaints that the federal government hasn’t done enough to lessen the state’s role as the nation’s busiest illegal entry point.
Less than a day before the law was to take effect, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked key provisions, including a requirement that immigrants carry immigration papers. On Monday, Bea told Kneedler “I don’t think you have to spend a whole lot of time” arguing the unconstitutionality of that provision.
Hundreds of protesters gathers outside the federal courthouse in San Francisco before the hour-long hearing. Opponents of the law in this politically liberal city outnumbered supporters.
Afterward, Arizona’s governor said she intended to appeal any adverse ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. Illegal immigrants are overwhelming Arizona’s health care systems, schools and prisons, she said.
Brewer said the Obama administration’s lawsuit was misguided because the state law seeks only to address a growing problem in Arizona.
“We are not the enemy — we are part of the United States,” she said. “We need more help and support.”More
thank you for article Battleskin

 

New evidence undermines feds’ case against Arizona

You’ve heard a lot about the Justice Department’s lawsuit to stop the new Arizona immigration law. But that’s just one part of the Obama administration’s multi-front war on immigration enforcement in Arizona.
In addition to the drive to kill the new law, Attorney General Eric Holder is also suing the Maricopa Community College system in Phoenix, alleging it broke the law by requiring a job seeker to provide a green card before being hired. And on Thursday the Justice Department filed suit against the Maricopa County Sheriff’s office, run by the flamboyant Joe Arpaio, as part of an extended investigation into alleged civil rights violations there.
Despite the splash of attention from the newest lawsuit, the Justice Department’s investigation of Arpaio could end badly for Holder. When the Department first informed Arpaio that a probe was under way, back in March 2009, it sent a letter saying the investigation would focus on “alleged patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures.” But now we learn that just six months before that, in September 2008, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, known as ICE, did its own investigation of Arpaio’s office — and gave it a clean bill of health.(more)

'Don't Tread On Me' Almost As Symbolic As The Flag Of The USA

I know and understand it is going to take a whole lot more then waving this flag for things to really be done and I also wanted to mention that I put this up   I guess in comparison of how all the illegals are coming to the united states and the government hasn’t really done anything about it and I suppose that flying this flag is one way they are seeing an impact of real battle fought.

 

 

'It had been the policy of Britain to send convicted criminals to America, so Franklin suggested that they thank the British by sending rattlesnakes to England.[1]‘’

The words from Gadsden's flag are some of the most patriotic words to this country as the  founding of the United States of America, as the flag of the United States, now it seems it is offending some people across the country.

Why is that, because the 'Tea Party' showing that they are fed up and feel violated?  Or is it due to the treatment/mis-treatment by Elected officials in the US Government, who just won't or don't listen?  I know, maybe because of the way US citizens are made to feel second class and like criminals in their own country?

'The use of the timber rattlesnake as a symbol of the American colonies can be traced back to the publications of Benjamin Franklin. In 1751, he made the first reference to the rattlesnake in a satirical commentary published in his Pennsylvania Gazette. It had been the policy of Britain to send convicted criminals to America, so Franklin suggested that they thank the British by sending rattlesnakes to England.^[1]'

Let's hope the ACLU is willing to represent all that decide to fly this flag and are saying 'No More' and 'We're not going to take it anymore'

 
An Arizona man is in trouble with his homeowners' association over flying the Gadsden flag, which features a coiled rattlesnake and the words "Don't Tread on Me." The flag has been adopted by members of the tea party movement for its association with the American Revolution,
Arizona has a state statute that allows Arizonans to fly "the Stars and Stripes, the state flag, flags representing Indian nations as well as the official flags of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard," the Times reports.'Andy' McDonel's homeowners' association is strictly interpreting that law to ban the flying of any other flags, including the Gadsden. The American Civil Liberties Union is defending McDonel, saying the homeowners' group is taking too strict a view of the statute and restricting McDonel's right to free speech.McDonel isn't the only person to run into a dispute over the historic flag.
Eric Smith of Thornton, Colo., said he and his neighbor were sent a letter by their homeowners' association that said "Tea Party flags are not permitted. Please Remove."  They were threatened with a $100-a-month fine for flying the Gadsden flag. Colorado has a statue similar to Arizona's that specifies which flags are allowed to be flown. The homeowners' association eventually reversed its demand, saying his flag fell into the category of "political signs" instead of flags and was thus allowed.
In March, House Republicans created a stir amid the hard-fought vote on health care reform by grabbing a Gadsden flag from the anti-reform crowd assembled outside the Capitol and brandishing it from within the building.
more

Let The Protestors, Arrests Begin In Arizona. . .

Although U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday threw out some of the more controversial parts of SB 1070, temporarily blunting the new law’s impact, hundreds of demonstrators gathered at dawn to protest. They marched from the state Capitol and held a prayer vigil before moving on to the federal courthouse, where police in riot gear waited.

A protester shouts at a riot policeman before being arrested at a demonstration

A few hours later, demonstrators blocked downtown streets as they chanted, “Hey ho, hey ho, SB 1070 has got to go.” They also converged on the office of controversial Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, yelling, “Sheriff Joe, we are here, we will not live in fear.”

Three people were arrested at the courthouse. At least eight protesters who approached a police line were taken into custody, as were two dozen others who sat down in the middle of a street and blocked traffic.
In Tucson, traffic on I-19 was briefly snarled after protesters threw tires, paint buckets and glass onto the roadway. One person was arrested.

Rep. Raul Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat and outspoken opponent of the law, closed his Yuma office after staff discovered a window shattered by a bullet.

But in Santa Cruz County along the border with Mexico, Sheriff Tony Estrada said Thursday was just another day. “Business as usual. No problems. It would have been different if I had to be enforcing that 1070,” said Estradamore

Arizona to Release Immigration Training Plan for Police Officers

Guide to Selected U.S. Travel and Identity Documents
Prepared by the Forensic Document Laboratory

Arizona officials plan to release a training program Thursday designed to teach police officers to enforce a tough new crackdown on illegal immigration without racially profiling.

An hour-long video and supporting paperwork will be sent to all 170 Arizona police agencies and publicly released Thursday morning.

Officials released an  outline for the video in May.





It will emphasize the importance of professionalism, ethics and integrity, as well as an officer's duty to protect civil rights, according to the outline.

Retired immigration agents also will describe how federal officers are trained to avoid racial profiling and the documents that immigrants are required to carry.

And officers will be taught how to contact federal immigration authorities or local officers certified by the federal government to determine someone's immigration status.

Gov. Jan Brewer ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to develop the training when she signed the law April 23.

Police bosses will decide the best way to teach their forces. But there is no requirement that all 15,000 Arizona police officers complete the training before the law takes effect July 29.

Opponents have challenged the measure as unconstitutional and have asked that a federal court block it from taking effect. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton plans to hear arguments on the request later this month.more
 

Obama Gives Back Major Strip of AZ to Mexico

The federal government is now telling American citizens to stay out of three southern Arizona counties. It is too dangerous because of armed smugglers from Mexico.

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu: Quite frankly I’m telling you as a sheriff that we don’t control that part of the county. My county is larger than the state of Connecticut and we need support from the federal government. It’s their job to secure the border and they haven’t done it. In fact President Obama suspended the construction of the fence.more

Déjà Vu? Hispanics flee

 

Illegal Immigrants Returning to Mexico in Record Numbers

08/25/2008

DALLAS — Illegal immigrants are returning home to Mexico in numbers not seen for decades — and the Mexican government may have to deal with a crush on its social services and lower wages once the immigrants arrive.
The Mexican Consulate’s office in Dallas is seeing increasing numbers of Mexican nationals requesting paperwork to go home for good, especially parents who want to know what documentation they’ll need to enroll their children in Mexican schools.  “Those numbers have increased percentage-wise tremendously,” said Enrique Hubbard, the Mexican consul general in Dallas. “In fact, it’s almost 100 percent more this year than it was the previous two years.”MORE
 
Hispanics flee Arizona ahead of immigration law 06/08/2010

Arizona’s tough new immigration enforcement law is fueling an exodus of Hispanics from the state seven weeks before it goes into effect, according to officials and residents in the state.

Though no one has precise estimates, reports from school officials, businesses and individuals indicate worried Hispanics — both legal and illegal — are leaving the state in anticipation of the law, which will go into effect July 29.
Schools in Hispanic areas report unusual drops in enrollment. The Balsz Elementary School District is 75% Hispanic, and within a month of the law’s passage, the parents of 70 students pulled them out of school, said District Superintendent Jeffrey Smith. The district lost seven students over the same one-month period last year, and parents tell Smith the Arizona law is the reason for leaving.
“They’re leaving to another state where they feel more welcome,” he said.
The measure, signed into law April 23 by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, requires a police officer to determine a person’s immigration status if they are stopped, detained or arrested and there is “reasonable suspicion” they are in the country illegally.
About 100,000 illegal immigrants left Arizona after the state passed a law in 2007 that enhanced penalties on businesses that hired them, more