Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    saveourcountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    770

    Clemson warned not to take action

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Clemson warned not to take action on anti-illegal immigration proposal
    Recent federal court ruling trumps local and state decisions, attorney says

    Published: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - 2:00 am



    By Anna Simon
    STAFF WRITER
    asimon@greenvillenews.com


    What's your view? Click here to add your comment to this story.

    CLEMSON -- Clemson City Council took a wait-and-see stance Monday on a proposed law to curb illegal immigration after a federal court struck down a similar law in a Pennsylvania city.

    The recent federal court decision "trumps" any local or state decision, city attorney Kay Barrett told the council at a meeting to discuss Councilwoman Margaret Thompson's proposal to prohibit the city from doing business with companies that employ illegal immigrants.

    Businesses have "told me to my face that they have illegal immigrants working for them," Thompson said. "It is hurting our system. It is hurting our health-care system."

    It happened "because we let it," Thompson said.
    Advertisement

    Barrett responded, "My guess is a lot of people you think are illegal aren't."

    Barrett advised the council to wait for the issue to move through the courts. Any law enacted now would be met by costly lawsuits, she warned.

    U.S. District Judge James Munley struck down an ordinance in the city of Hazelton in a 206-page opinion that said states and local governments have no business trying to stem illegal immigration, The Associated Press reported.

    An opinion of that length is "almost unheard of," Barrett said.

    More than 100 municipalities in 29 states have proposed some form of anti-immigration action, either involving business licenses or landlord-tenant issues, "all of which now are void," Barrett said.

    The U.S. Constitution gives noncitizens the same property rights as citizens -- whether they are here legally or illegally, Barrett said.

    Clemson Mayor Larry Abernathy said Barrett's advice reaffirmed his opinion that immigration is a federal matter, but he said it is important that the council openly consider

  2. #2
    Senior Member NCByrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    892
    A good place to start would be every state taking on 287g!! The illegals hate it.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,853

    SC: Court ruling halts Clemson illegal alien ordinance

    CLEMSON, SC — The federal court smackdown of a Hazelton, Penn., ordinance punishing employers and landlords who hire or rent to illegal aliens has put the brakes on Clemson’s move to enact a similar ordinance.

    The Clemson City Council reached a consensus at a work session Monday that any effort on the matter should wait until the federal court’s ruling on the Hazelton ordinance has run the appeals process.

    Hazleton passed an ordinance July 13, 2006, to deter housing owners from renting to illegal aliens in an effort to reduce the crime and drain on city services associated with a large influx of illegals.

    The ordinance was challenged by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.

    City attorney Kay Barrett urged the council to scuttle any immediate plans in light of the court ruling.

    “No matter what side it comes down on, it gives us guidelines,â€

  4. #4
    Senior Member MinutemanCDC_SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    tracking the usurper-in-chief and on his trail
    Posts
    3,207
    How does a decision by a federal judge in Pennsylvania (United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) apply to South Carolina (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit)? One federal judge in one Circuit doesn't make the judicial decisions for the entire United States! That's the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court.
    One man's terrorist is another man's undocumented worker.

    Unless we enforce laws against illegal aliens today,
    tomorrow WE may wake up as illegals.

    The last word: illegal aliens are ILLEGAL!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Hartwell GA
    Posts
    192
    .............
    ( STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT EMPLOYMENT - BOYCOTT FIELDALE FARMS, PILGRIMS PRIDE & TYSON POULTRY )

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Hartwell GA
    Posts
    192
    We have a Republican president who has said:
    " The Constitution Is Just A Piece Of Paper "

    Why are they so worried?
    ( STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT EMPLOYMENT - BOYCOTT FIELDALE FARMS, PILGRIMS PRIDE & TYSON POULTRY )

  7. #7
    Senior Member Americanpatriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by JoinTheFight
    We have a Republican president who has said:
    " The Constitution Is Just A Piece Of Paper "

    Why are they so worried?
    Hopefully, we have a president that is just a temporary set-back.
    <div>GOD - FAMILY - COUNTRY</div>

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,853
    Quote Originally Posted by MinutemanCDC_SC
    How does a decision by a federal judge in Pennsylvania (United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) apply to South Carolina (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit)? One federal judge in one Circuit doesn't make the judicial decisions for the entire United States! That's the jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Courts will sometimes accept an opinion from outside their circuit as 'precedent' or 'persuasive authority' until the case goes up to the Supreme Court. But you are right; diversity among the circuits is exactly the basis for the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and hear the case. So the fourth circuit is not bound by a decision rendered in the third circuit - especially when the decision has not been reviewed on appeal. It's just unfortunate that this judge, who appears to be an activist, was the first to write an opinion on this issue.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •