Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

For years the Catholic Church has been losing numbers, IMO because of the homosexual child molesting priests. To make up for their lost numbers, they've been welcoming in illegal alien Mexicans. They protected them from law enforcement and have pissed all over the sovereignty of the US. Karma is a MOFO.

[url=http://www.examiner.com/x-35821-Immigration-Reform-Examiner~y2010m8d3-Drunk-illegal-alien-awaiting-deportation-kills-nun-in-Va]Drunk illegal alien, awaiting deportation kills nun in Va.[/url]

But they all come here to work. More like they come here to work you over. Ha!

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

This was posted on Craigslist Richmond. I thought I would share it with y'all.

SHERIFF JOE IS AT IT AGAIN!

Oh, there's MUCH more to know about Sheriff Joe!

Maricopa County was spending approx. $18 million dollars a year on stray animals, like cats and dogs. Sheriff Joe offered to take the department over, and the CountySupervisors said okay.

The animal shelters are now all staffed and operated by prisoners. They feed and care for the strays. Every animal in his care is taken out and walked twice daily. He now has prisoners who are experts in animal nutrition and behavior. They give great classes for anyone who'd like to adopt an animal. He has literally taken stray dogs off the street, given them to the care of prisoners, and had them place in dog shows.

The best part? His budget for the entire department is now under $3 million. Teresa and I adopted a Weimaraner from a
Maricopa County shelter two years ago. He was neutered, and current on all shots, in great health, and even had a microchip inserted the day we got him. Cost us $78.

The prisoners get the benefit of about $0.28 an hour for working, but most would work for free, just to be out of their cells for the day. Most of his budget is for utilities, building maintenance, etc. He pays the prisoners out of the fees collected for adopted animals.

I have long wondered when the rest of the country would take a look at the way he runs the jail system, and copy some of his ideas. He has a huge farm, donated to the county years ago, where inmates can work, and they grow most of their own fresh vegetables and food, doing all the work and harvesting by hand.

He has a pretty good sized hog farm, which provides meat, and fertilizer. It fertilizes the Christmas tree nursery, where prisoners work, and you can buy a living Christmas tree for $6 - $8 for the Holidays, and plant it later. We have six trees in our yard from the Prison.

Yup, he was reelected last year with 83% of the vote.
Now he's in trouble with the ACLU again. He painted all his buses and vehicles with a mural, that has a special hotline phone number painted on it, where you can call and report suspected illegal aliens. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement wasn't doing enough in his eyes, so he had 40 deputies trained specifically for enforcing immigration laws, started up his hotline, and bought 4 new buses just for hauling folks back to the border. He's kind of a 'Git-R Dun' kind of S heriff.

TO THOSE OF YOU NOT FAMILIAR WITH JOE ARPAIO

HE IS THE MARICOPA ARIZONA COUNTY SHERIFF

AND HE KEEPS GETTING ELECTED OVER AND OVER
THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY:

Sheriff Joe Arpaio (In Arizona ) who created the ' Tent City Jail':
He has jail meals down to 40 cents a serving and charges the inmates for them.

He stopped smoking and porno magazines in the jails. Took away their weights Cut off all but 'G' movies.

He started chain gangs so the inmates could do free work on county and city projects.

Then He Started Chain Gangs For Women So He Wouldn't Get Sued For Discrimination.

He took away cable TV Until he found out there was A Federal Court Order that Required Cable TV For Jails So He Hooked Up The Cable TV Again . Only Let In The Disney Channel And The Weather Channel.

When asked why the weather channel, He Replied, "So They Will Know How Hot It's Gonna Be While They Are Working ON My Chain Gangs".

He Cut Off Coffee Since It Has Zero Nutritional Value.

When the inmates complained, he told them, 'This Isn't The Ritz/Carlton...... If You Don't Like It, Don't Come Back.'

More On The Arizona Sheriff:

With Temperatures Being Even Hotter Than Usual In Phoenix (116 Degrees Just Set A New Record), the Associated Press Reports:
About 2,000 Inmates Living In A Barbed-Wire-Surrounded Tent Encampment At The Maricopa County Jail Have Been Given Permission To Strip Down To Their Government-Issued
Pink Boxer Shorts.

On Wednesday, hundreds of men wearing boxers were either curled up on their bunk beds or chatted in the tents, which reached
138 Degrees Inside The Week Before.

Many Were Also Swathed In Wet, Pink Towels As Sweat Collected On Their Chests And Dripped Down To Their PINK SOCKS.

'It Feels Like We Are In A Furnace,' Said James Zanzot, An Inmate Who Has Lived In The TENTS for 1 year. 'It's Inhumane.'

Joe Arpaio, the tough-guy sheriff who created the tent city and long ago started making his prisoners wear pink, and eat bologna sandwiches, is not one bit sympathetic.... He said Wednesday that he told all of the inmates: 'It's 120 Degrees In Iraq And Our Soldiers Are Living In Tents Too, And They Have To Wear Full Battle Gear, But They Didn't Commit Any Crimes,So Shut Your Mouths!'

Way To Go, Sheriff!

Maybe if all prisons were like this one there would be a lot less crime and/or repeat offenders. Criminals should be punished for their crimes - not live in luxury until it's time for their parole, only to go out and commit another crime so they can get back in to live on taxpayers money and enjoy things taxpayers can't afford to have for themselves.

If you agree, pass this on. If not, just delete it.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[url=http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-480998]ARIZONA ILLEGALS DEFACE AMERICAN FLAG - CNN iReport[/url]

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

@TTE: Good post. You should try the positive approach more often -- supporting your arguments to make a point, rather than attacking other viewpoints with hateful blabber. I'll bet you're good at it.

@mlmpetert: As best I can tell (from other sources) those people are not illegals, they only support illegal immigration (or oppose the law, I can't tell). Shame on CNN for missing that.

On another note, who the hell cares about defacing the flag? Is one form of free-speech better or worse than another? I would never dream of defacing the flag, but I don't get caught up in sensationalism. (let the flaming begin)

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

Crime happens in America all the time, I don't give a shit who commits them so long as they are punished. Carry on.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;718081]For years the Catholic Church has been losing numbers, IMO because of the homosexual child molesting priests. To make up for their lost numbers, they've been welcoming in illegal alien Mexicans. They protected them from law enforcement and have pissed all over the sovereignty of the US. Karma is a MOFO.

[URL="http://www.examiner.com/x-35821-Immigration-Reform-Examiner~y2010m8d3-Drunk-illegal-alien-awaiting-deportation-kills-nun-in-Va"]Drunk illegal alien, awaiting deportation kills nun in Va.[/URL]

But they all come here to work. More like they come here to work you over. Ha![/quote]You may want to check your facts, you sound like an idiot. A simple lookup on wiki before you made your post should've stopped this nonsense before it turned into a post. Facts are the problems in the Catholic Church were no greater than society as a whole.

As far as the Catholic Church losing membership and that's why they're protecting illegals, that's complete BS. Between 1997 and 2007 the Catholic population in the U.S. increased 15%. The Catholic Church supporting illegals staying in the U.S. has nothing to do with $$$$, it's based on compassion. Catholics aren't the only ones protecting illegals either. Last I checked, the Catholic Church didn't set any city policies for several sanctuary cities. Born again Pres. Bush did little to nothing to stem the tide of illegal immigration. And BTW not all Catholics agree with the church's stance on this.

Before you make a dumbass, offensive, statement like a nun being killed was "karma". Have your facts straight....and yes I'm Catholic.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;722476]@TTE: Good post. You should try the positive approach more often -- supporting your arguments to make a point, rather than attacking other viewpoints with hateful blabber. I'll bet you're good at it.

@mlmpetert: As best I can tell (from other sources) those people are not illegals, they only support illegal immigration (or oppose the law, I can't tell). Shame on CNN for missing that.

On another note, who the hell cares about defacing the flag? Is one form of free-speech better or worse than another? I would never dream of defacing the flag, but I don't get caught up in sensationalism. (let the flaming begin)[/quote]

Yeah i was wondering if they were illegals or not. I dont think they did anything illegal, so i dont think the cops had any reason to verify if they were legal or not. Regardless i think its poor taste for any media outlet to label people illegals without offering any explanation how they know this.

Also Slinging Sammy, i was raised Catholic and was an altar boy for the Alexandria diocese (i wasnt raped, fyi). I am not a practicing Catholic and have not been for at least 10 years. I followed my mom after she stopped going to church when the whole alter boy scandal stuff came out, primarily because of the way it was handled and covered up. I know other people who also have lost faith in the Catholic church because of what happened, and what continues to happen. I would have to assume that part of the growth in the church is due to the growth of the Hispanic population, since it seems most Hispanic people are Catholic. Either way TTE use of the word karma was very insensitive and wrong.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

Having come to this thread at a very late date I will offer something that I didn't see offered, if I've missed it then I can only say please forgive my wearding ways.

[url=http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/only-the-us-supreme-court-has-constitutional-authority-to-conduct-the-trial-of-the-case-against-arizona-governor-brewer/]ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial of the Case Against Arizona & Governor Brewer. « Publius-Huldah's Blog[/url]

[quote]1. Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. It is certain that only a few in Congress have even heard of it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.[/quote]

It appears to me that with all the lawyers in power, including Obama who is a Constitutional lawyer (you must be kidding me), reading the Constitution appears to be considered a waste of time or at the very least they think the average american doesn't read or care about that wonderful piece of legislation.

Sadly I must add the governor's lawyers seem to be in the same boat, they can't read either.

Governor, get yourself a more competent group/firm!

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=gafinfan;723351]Having come to this thread at a very late date I will offer something that I didn't see offered, if I've missed it then I can only say please forgive my wearding ways.

[url=http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/only-the-us-supreme-court-has-constitutional-authority-to-conduct-the-trial-of-the-case-against-arizona-governor-brewer/]ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial of the Case Against Arizona & Governor Brewer. « Publius-Huldah's Blog[/url]



It appears to me that with all the lawyers in power, including Obama who is a Constitutional lawyer (you must be kidding me), reading the Constitution appears to be considered a waste of time or at the very least they think the average american doesn't read or care about that wonderful piece of legislation.


Sadly I must add the governor's lawyers seem to be in the same boat, they can't read either.

Governor, get yourself a more competent group/firm![/quote]

The problem isn't their understanding of the Constitution but your profound misunderstanding of it and our judicial system. Like, ummm, federal courts assist, ummm, like, ummm, the Supreme Court. Capisce?

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=saden1;723705]The problem isn't their understanding of the Constitution but your profound misunderstanding of it and our judicial system. Like, ummm, federal courts assist, ummm, like, ummm, the Supreme Court. Capisce?[/quote]

My profound misunderstanding of it, Hmmm.

Article III section 2

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and [B]those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.[/B]

You know you really should take time to read it, your understanding of it would then be profound, ummm, like, ummm the lower courts have NO legal right to render a ruling. Capisce?

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

I'd really like a lawyer to chime in, but here is a good article on original jurisdiction:

[url=http://law.onecle.com/constitution/article-3/32-original-jurisdiction.html]The Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court - United States Constitution[/url]

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

There is lots of [URL="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=2&invol=297"]historical background[/URL] on the subject but all that's needed is [URL="http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm"]The Judiciary Act of 1789[/URL] passed by the first congress:

[QUOTE]SEC. 13. And be it further enacted, That the Supreme Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies of a civil nature, where a state is a party, except between a state and its citizens; and except also between a state and citizens of other states, or aliens, in which latter case it shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction. And shall have exclusively all such jurisdiction of suits or proceedings against ambassadors, or other public ministers, or their domestics, or domestic servants, as a court of law can have or exercise consistently with the law of nations; [B]and original, but not exclusive jurisdiction of all suits brought by ambassadors, or other public ministers, or in which a consul, or vice consul, shall be a party.[/B] And the trial of issues in fact in the Supreme Court, in all actions at law against citizens of the United States, shall be by jury. The Supreme Court shall also have appellate jurisdiction from the circuit courts and courts of the several states, in the cases herein after specially provided for; and shall have power to issue writs of prohibition to the district courts, when proceeding as courts of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, and writs of mandamus, in cases warranted by the principles and usages of law, to any courts appointed, or persons holding office, under the authority of the United States.[/QUOTE]



p.s. You can take any suite to the Supreme Court but that doesn't mean it will get reviewed and you get adjudication.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=saden1;725527]There is lots of [URL="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=2&invol=297"]historical background[/URL] on the subject but all that's needed is [URL="http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm"]The Judiciary Act of 1789[/URL] passed by the first congress:[/quote]

I am sure we can bicker back and forth, but The Judiciary Act of 1789, and specifically part of clause 13 was nullified by Marshall:
[quote=From my other link]
However, another clause of § 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was not accorded the same presumption by Chief Justice Marshall, who, interpreting it as giving the Court power to issue a writ of mandamus on an original proceeding, declared that as Congress could not restrict the original jurisdiction neither could it enlarge it and pronounced the clause void.1093[/quote]

I doubt gafinfan's right that the lawsuit was invalid solely because it was brought in the wrong court, but really, unless I miss my guess, none of us are Supreme Court scholars.

Of course I realize Saden stays at a Holiday Inn Express EVERY night, so he is always chocked full of knowledge!

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;725531]I am sure we can bicker back and forth, but The Judiciary Act of 1789, and specifically part of clause 13 was [B]nullified [/B]by Marshall:


I doubt gafinfan's right that the lawsuit was invalid solely because it was brought in the wrong court, but really, unless I miss my guess, none of us are Supreme Court scholars.

Of course I realize Saden stays at a Holiday Inn Express EVERY night, so he is always chocked full of knowledge![/quote]

You're sure he nullified section 13? You should read your own link again, understand it, then try again. Nullify means a specific thing.

You don't have to be a Supreme Court Scholar or stay at a Holiday Inn to know you sue officials in Federal Courts before the Supreme Court. I have sued several federal official pro-se and successfully in Federal Court.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=saden1;725536]You're sure he nullified section 13? You should read your own link again, understand it, then try again. Nullify means a specific thing.

You don't have to be a Supreme Court Scholar or stay at a Holiday Inn to know you sue officials in Federal Courts before the Supreme Court. I have sued several federal official pro-se and successfully in Federal Court.[/quote]

I didn't say he nullified section 13, I said he nullified a part (or clause) of it, or as my link said, he voided it. But, please continue your lectures, personally I am always entertained.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;725546]I didn't say he nullified section 13, I said he nullified a part (or clause) of it, or as my link said, he voided it. But, please continue your lectures, personally I am always entertained.[/quote]

I enjoy being professorial...you reach I teach is my motto.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=saden1;725536]You're sure he nullified section 13? You should read your own link again, understand it, then try again. Nullify means a specific thing.

You don't have to be a Supreme Court Scholar or stay at a Holiday Inn to know you sue officials in Federal Courts before the Supreme Court. I have sued several federal official pro-se and successfully in Federal Court.[/quote]

Oh dear, are you the President or the AG suing a State?

Let us be clear about which we debate and Marshall was right IMVHO.

The full text:

[quote]Section 2 - Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials

(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. [B]In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.[/B]

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.[/quote]


Marshall was quite correct in his ruling: In all other cases the Congress shall have Exceptions as they may by law have directed.

One doesn't have to be a lawyer to see that common sense tells us that if Congress were to be able to legislate the Supreme Court there would be no justification for having one in the first place. It is in fact one of the three branches equal to and in balance with the other two. JMO of course being I never stay at the Holiday Inn.:laughing-

BTW I never said one couldn't do whatever as surely history has shown us the government has trashed the Constitution whenever they felt the need to grab more power, as in any crisis will do. Never the less that does not make it right. ;)

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

You're right, they're all stupid and wrong about the Constitution and case jurisdiction. Sadly the Constitution means nothing anymore and people seem to be OK with it.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[url=http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2010/el2010-26.html]FRBSF Economic Letter: The Effect of Immigrants on U.S. Employment and Productivity (2010-26, 8/30/2010)[/url]

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=SmootSmack;725683][URL="http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2010/el2010-26.html"]FRBSF Economic Letter: The Effect of Immigrants on U.S. Employment and Productivity (2010-26, 8/30/2010)[/URL][/quote]

I think it only to fair to post an "Idaho" Federal Reserve publication to neutralize your SF post.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[url=http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/10/floridas_arizona-style_immigra.php]Florida's Arizona-Style Immigration Bill Would Give Canadians, Europeans a Free Pass - Miami News - Riptide 2.0[/url]

i guess people from visa waiver countries can't be here illegally.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=saden1;750349][url=http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2010/10/floridas_arizona-style_immigra.php]Florida's Arizona-Style Immigration Bill Would Give Canadians, Europeans a Free Pass - Miami News - Riptide 2.0[/url]

i guess people from visa waiver countries [B]can't[/B] be here illegally.[/quote]

Its not that they cant, but because they dont want to be here permanently, legally or not. People from visa waiver counties live in developed and politically stable counties. America and other counties allow visa waiver countries to visit their economies for up to 90 days without additional paperwork.

The headline is misleading because only part of Europe (the non-emerging counties) are included. Not all of Europe is allowed, just the part that is developed and politically secure. Apparently people from developed and politically stable countries arnt usually illegal immigrants.... who knew?

Also 4 countries from Asia are allowed (which the headline neglects to include for some reason) in addition to the Australia and New Zealand.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

[quote=mlmpetert;750367]Its not that they cant, but because they dont want to be here permanently, legally or not. People from visa waiver counties live in developed and politically stable counties. America and other counties allow visa waiver countries to visit their economies for up to 90 days without additional paperwork.

The headline is misleading because only part of Europe (the non-emerging counties) are included. Not all of Europe is allowed, just the part that is developed and politically secure. Apparently people from developed and politically stable countries arnt usually illegal immigrants.... who knew?

Also 4 countries from Asia are allowed (which the headline neglects to include for some reason) in addition to the Australia and New Zealand.[/quote]

There is a difference between wanting to go back to their country and having to go back. Given the chance a lot of them would want to stay. What they do have compared to the brown people south of the boarder is the ability to come here at will and obtain work visas. I mean, look at some of those countries on the list and tell me some of their people wouldn't want to stay here.

There is also the matter of this all being about enforcing our immigration laws. Why should a legal Cuban resident of Florida get more scrutinized than a Frenchman or Korean?

Give the brown people visas for low wage jobs and see what happens.

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

I meant to post this last week:

"The president this week gave the illegal aliens renewed hope by announcing new rules allowing non-violent illegal immigrants to remain in the country indefinitely. Unfortunately, he never explained how the government will know if an illegal alien -- with no identity to speak of -- possesses a propensity for violence and crime," Baker added.

[url=http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/obama-cheered-by-illegal-alien-advocates-but-they-want-more]Obama cheered by illegal alien advocates, but they want more - National Law Enforcement | Examiner.com[/url]

Whats funny, is a couple days after signing the order Obama's illegal immigrant uncle got a DUI. Fortunately for the President he has been in this situation before so he should be well equipped to deal with it:

Another one? You can’t be serious.

Americans were enraged last year by the story of Barack Obama’s illegal alien Aunt Zeituni. Zeituni had mooched the system in Boston for public housing, welfare and food stamps for years. All while ignoring deportation orders and skipping immigration hearings, before a judge (in an unprecedented closed hearing) granted her asylum in May 2010. You may recall that Obama’s grifter Aunt wasn’t exactly humble or grateful about her experience:

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHoAuk76fT8]Obama's Illegal Aunt: "You Have The Obligation to Make Me a Citizen" - YouTube[/url]

Now is has been reported that Obama has another close relative in the U.S. illegally who is gaming the system in the sanctuary state of Massachussetts.

Onyango Obama, 67, is the “Uncle Omar” mentioned in the president’s book, “Dreams From My Father.” He is also from from Kenya and is the brother of Zeituni. And last week, “Uncle Omar” Obama was arrested in Framingham, Mass. for DUI and nearly colliding with a police car. The details:


Obama failed a field sobriety test after almost running his SUV into a police car in Framingham, Mass, near Boston. According to a police report, he rolled through a stop sign and then made a quick left turn, requiring the squad car and another vehicle to slam on their breaks to avoid hitting him.

As if there was any doubt about his connection with the President, “Uncle Omar” cleared that up right away when he was booked:


Framingham Public Information Officer Lieutenant Delaney said when Onyango Obama was asked at the station if he wanted to make a telephone call to arrange for bail, he replied:[B] “I think I will call the White House.”[/B]

Well, how nice for him. And how do we know he is here illegally?


Obama has a federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement warrant for his arrest. ICE has previously ordered him to be deported back to Kenya…. Judge Douglas Stoddart did not set any bail on the driving charges but ordered him held on the ICE warrant.

Sound familiar? That is what Aunt Zeituni faced as well, minus the DUI of course. In fact, it has now been reported that “Uncle Omar” has retained Cleveland lawyer Margaret Wong – the same immigration attorney who successfully represented Mr. Obama’s sister Zeituni, when she managed to avoid deportation to Kenya.

[url=http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2011/08/28/obamas-illegal-alien-uncle-arrested-for-dui-in-boston-will-obama-stop-deportation/]Obama’s Illegal Alien Uncle Arrested for DUI in Boston (Will Obama Stop Deportation?) | Stand With Arizona[/url]

Re: Arizona's New Immigration Law
 

Also this may be worth mentioning:

[URL="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h3b-d_OCuhcpxIKDxnVNJ-j3mk6A?docId=a8944c0968af4147901bc0a6fedb700c"]The Associated Press: Perry bills feds $349M for illegal immigrants[/URL]