'Clarity' on states' immigration measures needed from high court, attorneys say

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 14, 2011 1:37 p.m.

    Here is some clarity needed... if law breakers who cross our borders are rewarded and ignored then why are crooks who rob and steal sent to prison? Double standard? Isn't breaking the law breaking the law?

  • Neanderthal Salt Lake, UTah
    Dec. 14, 2011 11:30 a.m.


    "Is that enough clarity?"


    The only problem is, the Federal government refuses to do anything about it... the reason is simple: The Hispanic vote.

    Our country is essentially lost to aliens/foreigners. They sneak into this country in a variety of ways and will never have to leave because our politicians, including Obama and his minions, refuse to do anything about it. And they keep coming with that encouragement... sucking up government handouts by the billions. This was a nice country while it lasted. But it's over. We soon will be relegated to a third world nation status with civil/race wars.


    "Remember, a large all powerful central government was one of the things our founding fathers feared the most. Yet two and a quarter centuries later that is exactly what we have."

    What the founding fathers failed to recognize can be summed up thusly: Where does an elephant (federal government) sit? Anyplace it wants.

    There is no authority higher than the federal government... except 'we the people.' But 'we the people' can't seem to get it together enough to beat the federal government back to the intended level of authority/power.

  • Y-Ask-Y? Provo, UT
    Dec. 14, 2011 9:36 a.m.

    Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff is an embarrassment. He has described Utah's laws as "Arizona-lite," but then claims "Utah's laws are markedly different than Arizona's."

    Lite = markedly different?

    What kind of fools does he take us for?

    Is he also on board with all the amnesty crowd, but trying to tell us it really isn't amnesty?

    Dec. 13, 2011 7:57 p.m.

    So illegal immigration is down to a 40 year low according to recent data. So one has to wonder why the fixation? What are people avoiding looking at? Why the slight of hand by so many politicians?

    Dec. 13, 2011 7:41 p.m.

    There is a good chance the Supreme court gives jurisdiction to the Federal government, but makes exceptions, since states are carrying the financial burden.

    Question is, will our local and Federal government follow the Supreme courts decision? Or will they ignore it like they do with other immigration issues such as identity theft.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 6:50 p.m.

    Reporter Cortez seems to have the same myopic view as the DOJ and President Obama.
    All are focusing on the rights of states to enforce the law, while at the same time ignoring the other side of the coin.
    If immigration is the purview of the federal government, do states have the right to determine immigration status as part of the DPC license program?
    Do states have the authority to grant state-level work permits to guest workers from other nations?
    It seems that they are all too willing to allow states to do some federal things, but are opposed to allowing them to screen suspects for immigration status.
    This is a tough position to take, given the 287g authority granted, the CAP program, Secure Communities and the millions spent every year to maintain the federal LESC facility so local police can access the database to determine...well...immigration status.
    What's wrong with this picture?

  • TRUTH Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 3:57 p.m.

    Clarity? I think the clarity that the amnesty folks are looking for can be found in the decision of the SCOTUS to hear the Arizona case alone.....

    If you are illegal....get ready....if the SCOTUS sides with Arizona there will be a plethora of laws written in red states aimed at cleaning house of illegal immigration aimed at employers......time to move to NY/IL/CA/MA/OR/WA....

  • spring street SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 3:31 p.m.

    Two things first only 0.1% of the cases heard by the 9th circuit court of appeals are ever taken up by the supreme court meaning that the other 99.9% have been found to have no reason for being challenged or reviewed by the supreme court.
    the Supremes reversed the 3rd and 5th Circuits almost all of the time last term. Cases from state appellate courts fared no better: They also had a 100 percent reversal rate. Overall, this past term the Supreme Court reversed 75.3 percent of the cases they considered on their merits.
    The supreme court only takes up those cases that are found to have some marit meaning they will not even review a case unless there is good cause to believe that the lower courts got it wrong so the fact that 99.9% of the cases heard at the 9th circuit never make it to the suprime court does not speak well to your argument.

  • realsoothsayer SANDY, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 3:20 p.m.

    The "clarity" that many want is just a continuation of the green light from the boys in Washington, so the cheap-labor profiteers can keep hiring under the table with the rest of us funding all their benefits. And, of course they have the help of all the liberals who think that money grows on trees, and we can afford to import the entire third-world and all their problems, and don't realize that the "melting pot" can just end up being a pot that won't flush.

  • awsomeron Waianae, HI
    Dec. 13, 2011 2:17 p.m.

    It appears that Arizona is going to protect its Borders with or without the help of the United States.

    I would cut all Federal and State Funding to "Safe Citys". Also have Huge Fines an Prison time in place for people who hire illegals.

    In the land of enforcement you only have to enforce a few and make noise about it and most of the others will fall in line. Then you can go after the rest.

  • awsomeron Waianae, HI
    Dec. 13, 2011 1:43 p.m.

    We do have clear laws. The problem is that people want to get around those rules so the illegals can come in and work, live, and use our medical and welfare system.

    There is a legal way to come into the United States. If they do not use that method then they need to be deported.

    I am sorry for No One except the kids that came here real young and have been here most of there lives, and through no fault of their own must return to their parents home country.

    We perhaps need some passion and laws to deal with that issue. In the mean time we need to enforce the laws we do have.

    In a lot of cases the up tight and out of sight people have had laws passed.

    Passing a Law and enforcement of that law are two vastly different things.

    I don't want to deport a teenager who is going to school, working and is still 4.0 out the door, with two clubs and a Vol Internship. Headed to the Y.

    However the law in being equal is unequal. Also unequal in enforcement

  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 1:23 p.m.

    Recently I read that Utah taxpayers are on the hook for I believe $483,000,000 a year total cost for illegals. This includes welfare,law enforcement, medical, schooling and infrasture cost. If this figure is true, there should be fines for businesses hiring illegals equal to the costs and fines for the cost of legal citizens who get laid off and have to receive unemployment because undocumented people took their job. It is only when businesses realize that they can't profit by using illegals and then put the burden on others that it is going to stop.All the overbuilding in Utah which has put so many homeowners underwater is an example of extreme greed much of created by hiring illegals.

  • Kathy. Iowa, Iowa
    Dec. 13, 2011 1:19 p.m.

    I think the laws on the books are already quite clear.

    Recently I saw a special on the War of 1812 and the citizens in Baltimore and New Orleans came to the defense of our country in it's hour of need. Obviously they can't defend our borders and need the help of the states and their citizens.

  • DeltaFoxtrot West Valley, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 1:02 p.m.

    We need a constitutional convention. The states can fix the budget, immigration, healthcare and education if given the opportunity. The Federal govt doesn't want states to do this, they would rather impose their own plan which only serves their interests. What is the federal govt. interested in? What has it been interested in for the past 30 years? Gaining more power.

    Remember, a large all powerful central government was one of the things our founding fathers feared the most. Yet two and a quarter centuries later that is exactly what we have.

    As originally designed the federal government was tasked with establishing justice (courts), providing for the common defense (armed forces), promoting general welfare (business/trade regulation), and securing liberty (combination of the above). That's really all it needs to be doing. Everything else was left to the states, and the states need to make sure it stays that way.

  • 1conservative WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 12:45 p.m.

    First of all: the 9th circuit court is the most liberal court in the country, 70 percent of their decisions get reversed by the SCOTUS, so what they did (or didn't) say really has little meaning.

    The article itself alludes to the fed. authority to establish "naturalization".

    Arizona, Utah, and all other states who are trying to protect their borders have NO INTENTION to grant citizenship to anyone. All the states are doing is trying to make sure tax dollars are spent on ACTUAL LEGAL CITIZENS and keep jobs for legal residents.

    The states just want to enforce the existing laws. The feds obviously don't do a very good job of immigration enforcement or we wouldn't even be having this discussion!

  • Jazz Bass Man Wellsville, Utah
    Dec. 13, 2011 12:34 p.m.

    Obama called those of us American citizens who expect the government to do their jobs and enforce our border the "enemies". Would we expect anything more from his administration other than to fight the states and the citizens who want to protect this country from the illegal mexican mobs, gangs, drug dealers who are invading our country?

    If the supreme court does not rule in favor of the legal citizenry, then we truly have lost our country to the left wing elites who are out to destroy our constitution, freedoms, and our way of life.

  • The_Kaiser Holladay, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 11:24 a.m.

    The federal governement, by Constitutional right, is supposed to handle immigration policy.

    However, when government fails to act, it cannot punish or instigate the states for their self-protecting activities, especially border states.

    How is it fair that the government doesn't act in proportion to the problem, and the states do so, but get sued by the government? Makes no sense. But then again, our government makes no sense.

  • IJ Hyrum, Ut
    Dec. 13, 2011 11:13 a.m.

    It seems to me that the federal government needs to set guidelines that will instruct those seeking entrance so they may proceed legally into the country.

    If (because) the federal government fails to do their job or illegals somehow evade the federal authorities, each state should have the right to set their own laws.

    Illegal is just what the word states! Undocumented is illegal!

  • CJ Murray, UT
    Dec. 13, 2011 10:45 a.m.

    Here's some clarity for you. Immigrants,, 1- come here legally thereby demonstrating that you are here to obey the law and be a part of this country.2-learn English and demonstrate that you are here to adapt to our nation rather than expecting us to adapt to you and your culture that we don't care about.3-demonstrate that you are not going to have to rely on anyone other than your own resources or your own family for your support until you can support yourself. If you can't do any of the above then STAY HOME, if you already came here as a criminal GET OUT NOW! Attorneys, law enforcement officers, pandering politicians, and amnesty hacks, please see above. Anyone who doesn't obey the law should be subject to immediate arrest and swift deportation no matter where, or when they are found. Anyone who employs them goes to jail with them. Is that enough clarity?

    Dec. 13, 2011 10:41 a.m.

    We have clarity, come here illegally.