DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum 390 arrested in immigration raid in Iowa

Quote:

---

Need a mirror? Read through this thread and it's YOU throwing out most of the personal insults.

I do wonder when reading most of your arguments how much time you spent awake in law school.

---

Quote:

---

But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.

---

Quote:

---

Everybody satisfied now?

---

Quote:

---

I spent approximately 15% of my time in law school awake.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not a constitutional scholar and if you took those classes, then I will assume you know more about it than me... my point was never to imprison them for long periods or flog them for execute them, my point was to return them to their own country expeditiously (which I believe IS within the law)... then go after the company that hired them...

---

Quote:

---

job, are you an attorney, and are you a constitutional law attorney, or are you not?

Are you still in school, or are you a practicing attorney?

You know how everyone "jokes" about hating attorneys, right? Well, your view point on most subjects just enhances that widely held opinion.

These people are apparently NOT u.s. citizens. No one is saying "throw them in jail". No one is saying don't give them due process.....what people are saying is "due process for illegal immigrants is a bus ticket out of the country. End of story. Thanks for watching."

But, I am really, really curious if you ARE an attorney, or if you are in school to become an attorney. Why? For much the same reasons that I question others that are in college that seem to know so much more than us "old" people.

When a guy prefaces his comments with "well, I'm taking a class right now....and this is how it is." I take it with a grain of salt.

Are you a practicing attorney?

---

There is no possible way that someone with an apparent learning and comprehending disability could be an attorney or in law school.

Unless of course....


The school is using this book:

Quote:

---

I put him on ignore several weeks back...you can trust me here or not, but don't listen to much of what is said by him.

---

Quote:

---

And you're all lame for using the word lame.

Back to the topic: Derden, how is it ganging up on someone when it's really just a matter of a differing opinion and to who's word on a subject we'd value more?

Dude admitted to sleeping in 85% of his law classes, so how is he a reliable source for interpreting the law? Sorry, I like my sources to be a bit more knowledgeable than that.

---

Well he must have gotten 15% out of this

Quote:

---

Putting people on ignore is beyond lame. Ganging up on posters because they have a differing opinion is lame too.





This thread has become pretty lame.

---

Actually, putting someone on ignore is pretty smart, if that someone does nothing but post garbage (not in reference to jobincasa - just in general), so you saying that is lame is really kind of immature.

Also,why is it you say people are ganging up on someone because they have a different view? We can't have our views as well? Lemme guess.....you're becoming like too much of america......you'd rather believe the minority view than believe the majority.

And besides, we can all have our views - but we can all say someone else is wrong as well, can't we? Or is it ganging up if I believe what someone else believes?

Quote:

---

Even if he is practicing, it will be a long time before he gets it right. I figured out he is either sill in college or just blowing smoke when he told Peen awhile back that Peen didn't know how the judicial system works....and Peen was a judge for how long? LOL.

---

Quote:

---

Peen putting me on ignore tells me a lot about his desire to hear differing opinions. It's disappointing, considering he was a judge. I hope he was more open minded on the bench.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

"We are concerned that the sheer size of this raid is likely to result in numerous violations of the U.S. Constitution, which protects the due process rights of all persons in this country."

---

pssstttt Hey idiot, they shouldn't have any rights

---

Ding Ding Ding.. We have a winner!

You are 10000% correct GM.

---

I don't understand how you can say that and claim to be a patriot. You took an oath to defend the constitution, yet you blatantly spit on it.

Your ideas about rights of criminal defendants fall right in line with Al Queda, Hamas, and Sadaam Hussein. disgusting.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, I did take an oath.

To support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

You, jobenincasa, fall under domestic.

You disgust me.

---

Quote:

---

It isn't that Peen doesn't like opposing points of view. He, like many others, don't like people inventing things and trying to rewiret the Constitution to suit their lame arguemens.

---

Quote:

---

LOL, typical lawyer tactics. NO ONE was talkinga about a "cimrinal proceeding. This discussion was about them being deported. Then you twisted the intent of the Constitution with your bolded text. Now you are going to try to pretend you weren't misrepresenting what it said. You are unreal.

---

Quote:

---

I am a practicing attorney in California. I graduated at the top of my class.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Yes, I did take an oath.

To support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

You, jobenincasa, fall under domestic.

You disgust me.

---

Is that a threat?

We have seen the enemy, and he is us. Look in the mirror.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

LOL, typical lawyer tactics. NO ONE was talkinga about a "cimrinal proceeding. This discussion was about them being deported. Then you twisted the intent of the Constitution with your bolded text. Now you are going to try to pretend you weren't misrepresenting what it said. You are unreal.

---

once again, it is YOU who aren't paying attention. Go look at my original post. I was responding to someone who said that illegals have no rights. that's how this whole discussion got started. Just because you are on your own wavelength somewhere doesn't mean we're all there with you.

I notice you never thanked me for showing you where in the constitution it says that illegals have rights. I'll assume you meant to but forgot.

---

Quote:

---

To be a lawyer, as you claim, you can't follow conversation very well. GM was referring to the ACLU whining about the illegals rights being violated during their deportation process. The link that was posted by FF clearly shows that everything you stated does not apply to that situation. You even used that as proof you were right when, in fact, it stated what GM did. I hope you are better in a courtroom than you are here, but I doubt it.

---

Quote:

---

There is a more pragmatic interpretation.

1) Anyone in the US has the right to due process, even if they are here illegally.

2) I think the writers of the constitution or its ammendments were under the assumption that they were writing laws to protect american citizens or immigrants on the way to becoming citizens or foreign workers here with valid visas. The most probable scenario for those here illegally would be deportation. Parsing words does not help.

3) I hope the employer is fined big time, and the management appears to be fostering an enviornment to employ illegals. I hope they are nervous about a criminal lawsuit.

---

It's tough to know what the founders thought, because there was no such thing then as illegal immigration. If you were here, you could become a citizen. Unless you were a slave, of course.

Quote:

---

One thing I've learned in my dealings with the internet is that sarcasm or tone of any kind is taken out of context and cannot be read, as people can only see literal words and not actually hear the tone intended.....

Just curious here... why is it so difficult to just come here legally and undergo the naturalization process... just the right way? Someone tell me that. Does it take a long time, a lot of paper work, what is the problem with that?

---