Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 646
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 396
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
Starscream66 279
George Spelvin 265
sharkman29 255
Top Posters
DallasRain70793
biomed163231
Yssup Rider60955
gman4453294
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48654
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42591
CryptKicker37218
The_Waco_Kid37009
Mokoa36496
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-27-2012, 09:27 PM   #1
CuteOldGuy
Valued Poster
 
CuteOldGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
Encounters: 20
Default Mexico urges US court to block part of Arizona law

Really? Is this really Mexico's business?

The Mexican government has urged a U.S. court to stop Arizona from enforcing a minor section of the state's 2010 immigration law that prohibits the harboring of illegal immigrants.

Lawyers representing Mexico asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a filing Wednesday to uphold a lower-court ruling that blocked police from enforcing the ban. Mexico argued the ban harms diplomatic relations between the United States, undermines the U.S.'s ability to speak to a foreign country with one voice and encourages the marginalization of Mexicans and people who appear to be from Latin America. (OP Note: Isn't that for the US to argue?)

"Mexico cannot conduct effective negotiations with the United States when the foreign policy decisions of the federal governments are undermined by the individual policies of individual states," lawyers for the Mexican government said in a friend-of-the-court brief.

The harboring ban was in effect from late July 2010 until U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked its enforcement on Sept. 5. Two weeks before Bolton shelved the ban, she said during a hearing that she knew of no arrests that were made under the provision.

The prohibition has been overshadowed by other parts of the law, including a requirement that went into effect on Sept. 18 that officers, while enforcing other laws, question the immigration status of those suspected of being in the country illegally.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the questioning requirement earlier this year, but also struck down other sections of the law, such as a requirement that immigrants obtain or carry immigration registration papers. The nation's highest court didn't consider the harboring ban.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure known as SB1070 into law and serves as the statute's chief defender, has asked the appeals court to reverse Bolton's ruling on the harboring ban.

Brewer spokesman Matt Benson said Arizona's harboring ban mirrored federal law and that Mexico was interfering with a matter in U.S. courts.

"Mexico's own immigration laws are significantly more heavy-handed than anything imposed as a result of SB1070. Does the Mexican government believe the nearly identical U.S. federal law harms diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Mexico?" he said.

This wasn't the first time a foreign government has chimed in during disputes over the immigration law.

In 2010, Mexico urged the courts to declare the law unconstitutional, and 10 other Latin American countries had joined in expressing their opposition to the law.

Brewer had said the foreign governments were meddling in an internal legal dispute between the United States and one of its states.

No other countries have joined in Mexico's latest friend-of-court brief.


Read more: http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/2043518...#ixzz2GJjs15kN
CuteOldGuy is offline   Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 09:40 PM   #2
Chica Chaser
Premium Access
 
Chica Chaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 18, 2009
Location: Mesaba
Posts: 31,149
Encounters: 7
Default

Follow the money. This is all revolving around how much money is sent back to Mexico from legal and illegal workers here.

Amid U.S. unemployment crisis, illegal aliens sending even more money to Mexico
Quote:
Remittances, such as Western Union Moneygrams from the United States represent the second largest source of income for Mexico. In 2009, Mexican workers, mostly illegal aliens, sent home $21.2 billion in such transfers.

Furthermore, according to the Inter-American Development Bank, all of Latin America received $69.2 billion in remittances from the U.S. in 2009 alone.

Thus, dispelling the myth that illegal aliens contribute a great deal to our economy. The fact is that the overwhelming amount of the wages earned by illegal aliens is not spent in this country, but simply sent back home.
This filing isn't going anywhere with the old battleaxe we have out here

Chica Chaser is offline   Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 11:31 PM   #3
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

Remember how the dems used to make fun of Jan Brewer?
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 11:37 PM   #4
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 60,955
Encounters: 67
Default

You mean the loving Kayla of the Cocktus League?
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 12-27-2012, 11:55 PM   #5
Chica Chaser
Premium Access
 
Chica Chaser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 18, 2009
Location: Mesaba
Posts: 31,149
Encounters: 7
Default

She a piece of work for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
Remember how the dems used to make fun of Jan Brewer?
The Dems here don't have an exclusive on that one JD.
Chica Chaser is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 12:20 AM   #6
gnadfly
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 14,460
Default

Imagine 10-20 million now "not illegal" aliens walking into the US Social Security office and applying for benefits. Don't say "Well, you didn't pay SS tax." They will counter, "I worked in this country for these employers for years, its not my fault you didn't collect it." The soon to be liberal Supreme Court will be extremely sympathetic.

This country has been fundamentally transformed. There will be no going back.
gnadfly is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 07:40 AM   #7
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Liberal Supreme Court?
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 08:25 AM   #8
Jackie S
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 31, 2010
Location: Houston
Posts: 15,054
Encounters: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by i'va biggen View Post
Liberal Supreme Court?
They are getting old, President Obama has four years for just one 'consevative' to die off, and you then have a 5-4 court leaning to the liberal bent.

Elections have consequences. All of the sorry ass "white guys" who sat on their dead asses and didn't vote this last election have no complaints. You have a President that will stack the court with more Kagans and Sotomayors', and the Country will change. For the better or worse will have to be delt with by our Children and Grandchildren.

As for the whole immigration thing, that train left the station long time ago. What we have is what we are stuck with. My best advice is adapt and learn to live with it.
Jackie S is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 08:50 AM   #9
Guest040616
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
Elections have consequences. All of the sorry ass "white guys" who sat on their dead asses and didn't vote this last election have no complaints. You have a President that will stack the court with more Kagans and Sotomayors', and the Country will change. For the better or worse will have to be delt with by our Children and Grandchildren.
Are you talking about the same type of change that occurred when Republican Presidents (Reagan, Bush and Bush) stacked the court with Far Right Wing Justices like Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas?

That kind of change?
Guest040616 is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 08:55 AM   #10
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtex View Post
...with Far Right Wing Justices like ...Thomas?

That kind of change?
Really?
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 09:06 AM   #11
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
They are getting old, President Obama has four years for just one 'consevative' to die off, and you then have a 5-4 court leaning to the liberal bent.

Elections have consequences. All of the sorry ass "white guys" who sat on their dead asses and didn't vote this last election have no complaints. You have a President that will stack the court with more Kagans and Sotomayors', and the Country will change. For the better or worse will have to be delt with by our Children and Grandchildren.

As for the whole immigration thing, that train left the station long time ago. What we have is what we are stuck with. My best advice is adapt and learn to live with it.
None of the so called five conservative Justices are close to retiring. There might be two more SCJ that Obama appoints but they will be two of the most liberal. So it will be a net zero for liberals, where the GOP missed the boat was this was their chance to really pack the court with right wing loons. Mitt fuc'd it for ya.

What really hurt the Lib's was Sandy Day retiring early and letting Bush appoint her replacement. I still think there was something fishy about that! LOL...now I'm the guy with the tin foil hat!
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 09:13 AM   #12
Guest040616
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtex View Post
...with Far Right Wing Justices like ...Thomas?

That kind of change?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Really?
Yes, really!
Guest040616 is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 09:30 AM   #13
Guest040616
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF View Post
None of the so called five conservative Justices are close to retiring. There might be two more SCJ that Obama appoints but they will be two of the most liberal. So it will be a net zero for liberals, where the GOP missed the boat was this was their chance to really pack the court with right wing loons. Mitt fuc'd it for ya.
WTF is correct, during Obama's 2nd term in office he will probably have an opportunity to fill vacancy's from one or two of the following three Justices, Ginsburg, Breyer and/or Kennedy. There is an outside chance that Scalia might be replaced during Obama's term but it is unlikely. If Scalia were to be one of those replaced while Obama is in office, it probably would significantly shift the court. The other three would not have nearly as much impact, unless Obama replaced all three (which is highly unlikely).
Guest040616 is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 09:51 AM   #14
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtex View Post
Yes, really!
Why did you leave out Roberts? Because he voted "for" Obamacare?

And you think Thomas is more "conservative" than Roberts?

On topic, hopefully Mexico will get the same hospitality they give us with their court system, minus the mordida, of course.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 12-28-2012, 10:22 AM   #15
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackie S View Post
They are getting old, President Obama has four years for just one 'consevative' to die off, and you then have a 5-4 court leaning to the liberal bent.

Elections have consequences. All of the sorry ass "white guys" who sat on their dead asses and didn't vote this last election have no complaints. You have a President that will stack the court with more Kagans and Sotomayors', and the Country will change. For the better or worse will have to be delt with by our Children and Grandchildren.

As for the whole immigration thing, that train left the station long time ago. What we have is what we are stuck with. My best advice is adapt and learn to live with it.


All the old white guys voted the only problem is they needed some of the brown yellow and green guys to support their ideas.
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved