Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 2/12/2006 7:19:05 PM EDT
This year in California an initiative might be put on the ballot to create a State Border Patrol in recognition that the Federal Border Patrol is not effective in stopping illegal immigration, which is a known drain on the state economy (even though Bush says otherwise). Arizona is moving on this as well. The question is, will these new organizations be ruled unconstitutional, as they impinge on Federal jurisdiction? Who do you think would bring the complaint forward...the Bush Administration?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:22:41 PM EDT
All power not granted to the Federal Government belong to the State.

I would think a law like this would need some very creative wording to pass constitutional muster.

But what do I know??? I'm just some jackass posting drivel on the internet.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:27:04 PM EDT
And what is the remedy if State Border Patrols aren't constitutional?

will the Nine Ringwraiths of the SCOTUS swoop down and smite them? Andrew Jackson bet they couldn't enforce their decrees, told them to pound sand, and won.

will the Federal Government send the Border Patrol, the US Marshals, the FBI, the BATFEces, etc., down to the border to say "no, young state, STOP I say! You MUST leave that border unsecured!" Hey kids, can you spell political suicide for the president?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:28:17 PM EDT
I think states should protect their borders from each other.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:28:44 PM EDT
Couldn't they hire new state troopers but have their beats along the Mexican/US border?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:32:43 PM EDT
State Militia units, AKA the National Guard.


Other than that, if the governor of the states decides to create a State BP they should be allowed to, or allow the property owners along the border to form an armed coalition of tresspass enforcement (AKA citizens arrest). I am all for it, and would join such a movement if given a chance that didn't interrupt my cash flow (bills must be paid...)
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:38:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2006 7:39:02 PM EDT by www-glock19-com]
I think it would pass SCOTUS I mean damn as soon as they cross into that state it is a state problrem first fed second
it would be a political mess if the feds tried to keep the states from securing the border


there will be a big shooting clusterfuck invlvong US LE and Mexi officals ptretty eventally and this will really be at the forefront
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:40:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By krpind:
All powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government belong to the State.



Yup.

G
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:46:28 PM EDT
The constitution is a completely worthless relic. The men in power make it up as they go along. If state border patrols fit within their agenda then they will be allowed. If not, then they will not be allowed. Simple as that.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:51:01 PM EDT
Build the wall.

Catch the illegals

Toss them back

No court, no body.

Who really cares who catches them and tosses them back.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:51:56 PM EDT
I don't think the Feds could squash this by sending in the FBI or even the Nazgul.

However, they do control the pursestrings...so, states that try to field these patrols would face a cut-off of certain Federal funds.

It is clear to all but the blind that the men who control Bush have no desire to close our borders.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 7:54:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By nf9648:
I think states should protect their borders from each other.




yeah, Nevada should protect its border from Kali.


Ok, we know you're going to slide into the ocean, dont drag us down with you!
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:07:33 PM EDT
All Nevada has going for it is whores, organized crime, and illegal immigrant laborers.

They don't even have their own WATER.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:13:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/12/2006 8:15:29 PM EDT by nefariousnick]

All Nevada has going for it is whores, organized crime, and illegal immigrant laborers.

They don't even have their own WATER.



And don't forget

Full auto
AW's
Mags over 10 rounds
Switch blades
Hand guns you can't have
CCW
Face to face transfer, no FFL required


Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:15:41 PM EDT
It'll REALLY get interesting when Texas decides to set up a Border Patrol.

Recruiting poster: Join the TBP and drive an M1 tank at work!

Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:27:43 PM EDT
No problems passing a constitutional muster. Any LEO (or citizen in most states) can arrest somebody for violations of the law occuring in their presence. City, State, Federal or UN laws. Now will the US Attorney or ICE refuse to accept the prisoners? The states or cities can't prosecute federal violation in their courts.

<­BR>



OK not really UN laws but that will spin up some of the tin foil boys around here.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:38:58 PM EDT
As long as Mexico sells us oil, I don't see anything happening to secure the border.

Link Posted: 2/12/2006 8:48:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By nefariousnick:

All Nevada has going for it is whores, organized crime, and illegal immigrant laborers.

They don't even have their own WATER.



And don't forget

Full auto
AW's
Mags over 10 rounds
Switch blades
Hand guns you can't have
CCW
Face to face transfer, no FFL required





d'oh!
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 9:50:16 PM EDT
There should be no illusions. Patrolling the border costs a ridiculous amount of money. It's one thing for a government to say, "OK, you can do this thing." It's another thing for a government to say, "OK, we will cough up the money to do this thing for you."

I don't think anyone is opposed, in principle, to enforcing the rules we have about who we let into the country. The trouble is simply that people disagree as to how much money should be spent on it. How much is enough? A thousand dollars, a million, a billion? So you build your multi-million dollar fence around Texas, and man it with dick cheney with his shotgun and a hundred cops (each who gets paid $40/yr), and then what? When the Latinos keep coming, just in boats instead of cars, will you fill the San Diego bay with water mines? Will you check every container in every truck and ship coming into the US from MX?

You could spend a trillian dollars, and still the Latinos would find a way in, as surely as we could find a way out. This is a fight to the death; and they will do anything to live.

The question is: how much money do we want to spend?
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 11:36:06 PM EDT
This would not be unconstitutional. Because the states have a broad police power. When they enacted the law providing for the Border Patrol they would simply state that is was to protect their citizens from the crimes committed by those seeking to illegally gain residence within the state, yada yada yada.
As long as each state had their own patrols and it did not effect interstate or forgein commerce it should be ok.
The only problem might be if the government, in this case Mex., would protest the apprehension of their citizens by the states' authorities.
While the states can't enforce federal laws they could easily pass a law that requires legal immigration in order to gain residence within the state. It could be passed at the same time the border patrol is created.
Link Posted: 2/12/2006 11:59:36 PM EDT
I could see California putting the border patrol on the Nevada border:


"Sir, do you have any assault weapons in your vehicle?"
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:03:17 AM EDT
I'm sure that another law enforement agency within a state would be totally legal. Hell states have their own militaries. The National Guard, many have a state defense force that is answerable only to the governor and has no federal mission, and some like Washington can consript it's citizens in times of emergency.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:05:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By giacutter:
It'll REALLY get interesting when Texas decides to set up a Border Patrol.

Recruiting poster: Join the TBP and drive an M1 tank at work!




Where do I sign up?
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:12:54 AM EDT
Don't be so quick to knock the US Border Patrol.
They work hard at their job, but from my understanding, they lack support from upstairs.
The main problem is that once illegals get in the country, they are pretty much home free.
If you allowed states and towns to go after illegals once they got in the country, that would be far better than another set of fingers in the dike, so to speak.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:21:10 AM EDT
The ACLU would sue the state(s), and most likey win, for infringing on the "rights" of the poor unfortunate undocumented migrant workers.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 8:39:20 AM EDT
Didn't the Texas Rangers have this mission for years?
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 9:18:46 AM EDT
I thought that is what a states' National Guard was for? If not, I guess the Federal argument that the National Guard was the malitia to serve the a states' needs is flawed.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 9:25:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By nf9648:
I think states should protect their borders from each other.



That would be fucking brilliant.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 9:30:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dracster:
The ACLU would sue the state(s), and most likey win, for infringing on the "rights" of the poor unfortunate undocumented migrant workers.



I'm no lawyer, but I wonder about how they (liberals in general, ACLU in particular) might use the "Interstate Commerce " clause, especially as stretched to suit some liberal ideas. You're right that they would sue, and possibly win, especially if that fit a hidden agenda (Mexican oil, as some alluded).
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 10:59:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By PaDanby:
No problems passing a constitutional muster. Any LEO (or citizen in most states) can arrest somebody for violations of the law occuring in their presence. City, State, Federal or UN laws. Now will the US Attorney or ICE refuse to accept the prisoners? The states or cities can't prosecute federal violation in their courts.



That's an easy fix. Pass a state law saying that federal immigration violations are also state misdemeanors.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 11:18:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/13/2006 12:15:03 PM EDT by ASNixon]
I would think that the State Highway Patrol would fit this bill. Didn't the .gov of SC use them to turn away nuclear materials that were being trucked across their border not long ago? Aren't they also taxed with enforcing the laws of the state? I think they have a perfectly legitimate role as a state border patrol provided the state writes the law(s) correctly...
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 11:35:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MoparMike:
State Militia units, AKA the National Guard.


Other than that, if the governor of the states decides to create a State BP they should be allowed to, or allow the property owners along the border to form an armed coalition of tresspass enforcement (AKA citizens arrest). I am all for it, and would join such a movement if given a chance that didn't interrupt my cash flow (bills must be paid...)



Since the National Guard of the United States has been part of the peacetime defense establishment of the US since 1921 (National Defense Act of 1921, amended 1922 - which extended the previous Dick Act to peace), and is Federally funded, Federally organized, and Federally equipped, any governor that tried to use their state's NG as a "State Border Patrol" would find it Federalized and removed from their control ASAP. As George Wallace found out in Alabama when JFK pulled the Alabama ARNG out from under him in 1962/3.

The state could use its state police / highway patrol / "rangers" or state defense force (if it has one). Since foreign relations are a function of the Federal government, it would be best done some distance back from the actual border.
Link Posted: 2/13/2006 1:30:18 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ODA_564:

Originally Posted By MoparMike:
State Militia units, AKA the National Guard.


Other than that, if the governor of the states decides to create a State BP they should be allowed to, or allow the property owners along the border to form an armed coalition of tresspass enforcement (AKA citizens arrest). I am all for it, and would join such a movement if given a chance that didn't interrupt my cash flow (bills must be paid...)



Since the National Guard of the United States has been part of the peacetime defense establishment of the US since 1921 (National Defense Act of 1921, amended 1922 - which extended the previous Dick Act to peace), and is Federally funded, Federally organized, and Federally equipped, any governor that tried to use their state's NG as a "State Border Patrol" would find it Federalized and removed from their control ASAP. As George Wallace found out in Alabama when JFK pulled the Alabama ARNG out from under him in 1962/3.

The state could use its state police / highway patrol / "rangers" or state defense force (if it has one). Since foreign relations are a function of the Federal government, it would be best done some distance back from the actual border.



Even then they would run into trouble with the Feds unless they could show that none of the Fed LE funds recieved by the state are used by the new border patrol.
Top Top