Political News | Annuit Coeptis logo

Page added: 12:49 UTC, Thursday, 29th July 2010
Subscribe to our Feedrss feed
Author: NEPAConservative              Category: AC Analysis, Blog, Opinion

Aliens required to carry identification ANYWAY!!!

A Bill Clinton appointed, and undoubtedly liberal activist, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton struck down parts of the Arizona immigration law that goes into effect today. In simpler terms she neutered this bill.  Now it’s just a piece of paper that “don’t mean squat!”

She blocked a section that required foreigners to carry documents proving they had permission to be in the U.S.  This is in direct conflict with the federal US code.  Our federal code ALREADY has made this a requirement. Let me say this again, Our federal code ALREADY has made this a requirement. Does she understand that existing law already requires this?  Sadly enough I doubt hack Judge Susan Bolton understands, let alone cares about, existing US Code.  This is blatant judicial activism!!!   She should be removed immediately!

Here is what TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VII > § 1304 Section (e) Forms for registration and fingerprinting says:

(e) Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.

Once again the Arizona law simply reaffirms the federal law.

SO I NEED TO ASK THE QUESTION: WHAT IS WRONG WITH ARIZONA REAFFIRMING US CODE?

READ IT HERE:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001304—-000-.html

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Fleck
  • Propeller
  • Mixx
  • connotea
  • Furl
  • IndianPad
  • Faves
  • blogmarks
  • Folkd
  • LinkaGoGo
  • MisterWong

Tags: , , ,

  1. James Shott says:

    This is one of those things that seems to be obvious, isn’t it? I mean, the times I’ve visited other countries I have always had my “papers” with me at all times, and would not have been offended to have been asked for my ID, etc.

    After all, I was in a country of which I was not a citizen!!

    Still, I don’t think I’ve actually heard anyone make this point.

    • Marjorie Campbell says:

      Yes. But in this country there are many people in an “in between” status – neither legal alien nor illegal, who are in proceedings or under application – who will not have ID and are not required to have ID … just like a legal citizen is not required to have ID. The problem is a federally created problem of “limbo” for so many people. And a federal claim that they cannot/will not respond timely to the status of people.

      • NEPAConservative says:

        This is interesting. What does the law call in between” status people? I would think you either ARE a citizen or NOT a citizen. Can you reference the law or a procedure that governs this “in between status”? Please post a link. Thanks.




:p 8) :lol: =( :8 ;) :(( :o: :[ :) :D :-| :-[) :bloody: :cool: :choler: :love: :oups: :aie: :beurk:

Related Stories

Latest Headlines

Also In The News

828 Restoring Honor Rally (Open Thread) thumbnail
The left now believes in Freedom of Religion with your tax dollars! thumbnail
Headline Story Time Vol 1. thumbnail

Bad Behavior has blocked 1281 access attempts in the last 7 days.