Obama Slaps Intimidation Lawsuit on S...

Obama Slaps Intimidation Lawsuit on South Carolina Over Illegals

There are 26 comments on the www.humanevents.com story from Nov 7, 2011, titled Obama Slaps Intimidation Lawsuit on South Carolina Over Illegals. In it, www.humanevents.com reports that:

The Obama Justice Department has launched yet another outrageous lawsuit against a state acting within its broad police powers, this time drawing a bead on South Carolina over its immigration law.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.humanevents.com.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#1 Nov 7, 2011
Again we see our president refusing to enforce laws against illegals and suing states that do enforce the laws!!!! No question Big Business is blackmailing bammer, probably over the birther issue.
Lazy Rednecks

Elkhart, IN

#2 Nov 7, 2011
Speeders Kill Kids wrote:
Again we see our president refusing to enforce laws against illegals and suing states that do enforce the laws!!!! No question Big Business is blackmailing bammer, probably over the birther issue.
What part of " states cant do federal jobs" you dont understand.?!! Federal goes above buddy.. You should drop out of school..
Racer42

Oakland, CA

#4 Nov 7, 2011
Lazy Rednecks wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of " states cant do federal jobs" you dont understand.?!! Federal goes above buddy.. You should drop out of school..
You, obviously, already did. Right after the third grade would be my best guess.

Since: Jul 07

Newport News, VA

#5 Nov 7, 2011
i guess the justice dept does not deem black panthers wielding batons as intimidating.(hey, but watch out for those old white guys with a poster--scary!)

“It matters but not very much”

Since: Oct 07

Houston, TX

#6 Nov 7, 2011
Lazy Rednecks wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of " states cant do federal jobs" you dont understand.?!! Federal goes above buddy.. You should drop out of school..
You know absolutely nothing about state sovereignty, do you? What a joke. You embarass yourself, but you're too ignorant to realize it.

Since: Apr 10

La Canada Flintridge, CA

#7 Nov 7, 2011
Independent patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
You know absolutely nothing about state sovereignty, do you? What a joke. You embarass yourself, but you're too ignorant to realize it.
The Supreme Court has already made it clear in the 1800's that the regulation of immigration falls on the Federal Government.

Since you're here pontificating sovereignty of this Nation then you also need to acknowledge the supremacy clause found in the US Constitution.

What happened in the 1800's is what's happening today. States were attempting to make their own immigration regulation laws which were not uniform and the Supreme Court rectified that issue.

Just becuase the Federal Government is not appealing to your nazi border type mentality in no way give you the right to trample on Federal supremacy & Supreme Court ruling to satisfy your obviously zealous agenda of outright American dissidence.

Since: Apr 07

USA

#8 Nov 7, 2011
Ah...refreshing to see the Federal Government flexing its muscle and tying up all these laws in the courts for a few years...I just love the USA....

“Assimilate & Speak English!”

Since: Jan 07

Lansing, IL - now: Pomp Bch FL

#9 Nov 7, 2011
Lazy Rednecks wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of " states cant do federal jobs" you dont understand.?!! Federal goes above buddy.. You should drop out of school..
Ummmm....

Quote:

Given the U.S. Supreme Courtís rulings earlier this year, the Obama administrationís move looks spiteful, cynical and full of hubris. The court ruled 5 to 3 in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting that state laws conditioning business licenses on employee verification through E-Verify fall within statesí far-reaching police powers. The requirement serves a legitimate state interest, ensuring a legal workforce.

End Quote

Operative words: "fall within states' far-reaching police powers."

Guess you'd be wrong! Too bad!

“Assimilate & Speak English!”

Since: Jan 07

Lansing, IL - now: Pomp Bch FL

#10 Nov 7, 2011
Anyone who commits a crime should damn well be intimidated. I know I would! And I would blame myself, not the law. These illegal aliens and their supporters are seriously demented.

“It matters but not very much”

Since: Oct 07

Houston, TX

#11 Nov 7, 2011
The Real American wrote:
<quoted text>
The Supreme Court has already made it clear in the 1800's that the regulation of immigration falls on the Federal Government.
Since you're here pontificating sovereignty of this Nation then you also need to acknowledge the supremacy clause found in the US Constitution.
What happened in the 1800's is what's happening today. States were attempting to make their own immigration regulation laws which were not uniform and the Supreme Court rectified that issue.
Just becuase the Federal Government is not appealing to your nazi border type mentality in no way give you the right to trample on Federal supremacy & Supreme Court ruling to satisfy your obviously zealous agenda of outright American dissidence.
To what constitutional 'supremacy clause' do you refer? Section and article, please.

If you refer to the right to suggest a common naturalization procedure, that's the ONLY constitutional right granted to the federal government concerning citizenship, and it has nothing at all to do with immigration. Nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the right to tell states who they must permit to live within their territories.

States are sovereign entities, and prior to giving the federal government the ability to enforce immigration laws, states had their own immigration laws. The fedgov regulated immigration to new US territories only - never to states.

You need to study the constitution a bit more. The federal government in no way trumps state sovereignty. Never has, never will. To say otherwise is delusional or just plain ignorant.

Since: Apr 10

La Canada Flintridge, CA

#12 Nov 7, 2011
Independent patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
To what constitutional 'supremacy clause' do you refer? Section and article, please.
If you refer to the right to suggest a common naturalization procedure, that's the ONLY constitutional right granted to the federal government concerning citizenship, and it has nothing at all to do with immigration. Nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the right to tell states who they must permit to live within their territories.
States are sovereign entities, and prior to giving the federal government the ability to enforce immigration laws, states had their own immigration laws. The fedgov regulated immigration to new US territories only - never to states.
You need to study the constitution a bit more. The federal government in no way trumps state sovereignty. Never has, never will. To say otherwise is delusional or just plain ignorant.
I'm interested in dialogue, not educating you on what the supremacy clause of the US Constitution is.

Since: Jan 08

Corpus Christi Texas

#13 Nov 7, 2011
It is time for impeachment and trying for treason. Then the death sentence.

“Assimilate & Speak English!”

Since: Jan 07

Lansing, IL - now: Pomp Bch FL

#14 Nov 7, 2011
The Real American wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm interested in dialogue, not educating you on what the supremacy clause of the US Constitution is.
LMAO! Can't provide the exact section you're referring to and cannot admit you are WRONG!

“Assimilate & Speak English!”

Since: Jan 07

Lansing, IL - now: Pomp Bch FL

#15 Nov 7, 2011
The Real American wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm interested in dialogue, not educating you on what the supremacy clause of the US Constitution is.
Quote:

Given the U.S. Supreme Courtís rulings earlier this year, the Obama administrationís move looks spiteful, cynical and full of hubris. The court ruled 5 to 3 in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting that state laws conditioning business licenses on employee verification through E-Verify fall within statesí far-reaching police powers. The requirement serves a legitimate state interest, ensuring a legal workforce.

End Quote

'Nuff said.

“It matters but not very much”

Since: Oct 07

Houston, TX

#16 Nov 7, 2011
The Real American wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm interested in dialogue, not educating you on what the supremacy clause of the US Constitution is.
Ah, I see. So, you have no idea what you're dithering about.

I'd really be interested, though, to see what you think is a 'supremacy clause' is in the US Constitution.

“The "entitled" =communist.”

Since: May 10

MY MONEY, come take it.

#17 Nov 7, 2011
Independent patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
To what constitutional 'supremacy clause' do you refer? Section and article, please.
If you refer to the right to suggest a common naturalization procedure, that's the ONLY constitutional right granted to the federal government concerning citizenship, and it has nothing at all to do with immigration. Nothing in the constitution gives the federal government the right to tell states who they must permit to live within their territories.
States are sovereign entities, and prior to giving the federal government the ability to enforce immigration laws, states had their own immigration laws. The fedgov regulated immigration to new US territories only - never to states.
You need to study the constitution a bit more. The federal government in no way trumps state sovereignty. Never has, never will. To say otherwise is delusional or just plain ignorant.
It's "deflection with communistic intent" and the CPOS libs know it.

Since: Apr 10

La Canada Flintridge, CA

#18 Nov 7, 2011
Rebel wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO! Can't provide the exact section you're referring to and cannot admit you are WRONG!
If you & the other gentlewoman don't know what the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution is then I really don't know what to say to you or her.

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution

Since: Apr 10

La Canada Flintridge, CA

#19 Nov 7, 2011
Rebel wrote:
<quoted text>
Quote:
Given the U.S. Supreme Courtís rulings earlier this year, the Obama administrationís move looks spiteful, cynical and full of hubris. The court ruled 5 to 3 in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting that state laws conditioning business licenses on employee verification through E-Verify fall within statesí far-reaching police powers. The requirement serves a legitimate state interest, ensuring a legal workforce.
End Quote
'Nuff said.
What does this have to do with Independent Patriot not knowing what the Supremacy Clause is?

Anyhow, if S. Carolinas immigration laws conflicts with Federal law or SCOTUS rulings, then the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Govt applies.

This is high school knowledge.

I doubt that Obama would not waste his time if he knew he had no chance.

He did it to Arizona and he'll likely do it to S. Carolina.

Since: Apr 10

La Canada Flintridge, CA

#20 Nov 7, 2011
Independent patriot wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah, I see. So, you have no idea what you're dithering about.
I'd really be interested, though, to see what you think is a 'supremacy clause' is in the US Constitution.
So you really don't know what the supremacy clause is? A little embarrassing don't you think?

“It matters but not very much”

Since: Oct 07

Houston, TX

#21 Nov 7, 2011
The Real American wrote:
<quoted text>
So you really don't know what the supremacy clause is? A little embarrassing don't you think?
As I wrote, I'd like to see what YOU think the supremacy clause is.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

South Carolina Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News SC state senator refers to candidate as 'raghead' (Jun '10) 5 hr Reagan Amnesty 1,177
News Mississippi, Tennessee debate future of Confede... Thu Ronald 16
News Activist on taking down Confederate flag: 'All ... Jun 28 White Man 3
News SC lawmakers agree to debate removing Confedera... Jun 26 Flabbergasted 2
News High court ruling means more than 154K in S.C. ... Jun 26 private guy 1
News Mike Huckabee defends South Carolina against ra... Jun 25 JOEL KOVEL Fan 107
News SC state senator refers to candidate as 'raghead' (Jun '10) Jun 19 swedenforever 11
More from around the web