ywUntoldSpirit said:
Thanks.
SCOTUS: Texas can enforce immigration law
13,354 Views |
149 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Bull Meachem
Quote:
"The court gives a green light to a law that will upend the longstanding federal-state balance of power and sow chaos," liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a dissenting opinion. Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson also objected to the decision.
It's long past time our states took back the power that was granted to them through our Constitutional Republic. The federal government has become far too involved in areas it has no business in domestically while refusing to perform many of the duties enumerated to it in the Constitution.
Great Abbott
Just like Dems, the Catholic Church LOVES the invasion, I mean migration; they're help facilitating it (while turning a blind eye to the Cartels & human/ sex trafficking aspects).
Anyway, Justice Amy is a big-time Catholic; her position isn't surprising. If she's also a "soccer mom", it should be a given.
Anyway, Justice Amy is a big-time Catholic; her position isn't surprising. If she's also a "soccer mom", it should be a given.
Ken Paxton needs to be the Governor.
Will the left will use this like they used George Floyd in 2020?
Fight against the dictatorship of the federal bureaucracy!
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.
Start with the Soros funded Open Society Foundation.Hoyt Ag said:
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.
I don't know about any of that, but I assume the Government will take Coney and Kavanaugh at their word and ask for another stay "soon."Ag in Tiger Country said:
Just like Dems, the Catholic Church LOVES the invasion, I mean migration; they're help facilitating it (while turning a blind eye to the Cartels & human/ sex trafficking aspects).
Anyway, Justice Amy is a big-time Catholic; her position isn't surprising. If she's also a "soccer mom", it should be a given.
What "soon" means, who knows.
Brings to mind an interesting question. If being here illegally is a crime, does that mean anybody facilitating them to get here or helping them stay is an accomplice to that crime? What are the penalties for that?Hoyt Ag said:
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.
Actually I would start with Catholic church NGOs, then Open Society.
Antoninus said:Because the law in question creates a crime (misdemeanor). It does not authorize "sending them back" until after they have served their sentence (up to 6 months).Slicer97 said:Why?suburban cowboy said:
Now build a prison and compound that'll fit a million plus and start rounding em up
Round 'em up, stick 'em on a bus, and send them back across the border. Let Mexico pay to feed and house them.
County Courts at Law in South Texas are about to get very busy, and county jails are about to get very full.
Maybe if we didn't let them cross in the first place?
Because we can increase our electoral apportionment and total congressional seatsSlicer97 said:Why?suburban cowboy said:
Now build a prison and compound that'll fit a million plus and start rounding em up
Round 'em up, stick 'em on a bus, and send them back across the border. Let Mexico pay to feed and house them.
Martha's Vineyard?suburban cowboy said:Slicer97 said:Why?suburban cowboy said:
Now build a prison and compound that'll fit a million plus and start rounding em up
Round 'em up, stick 'em on a bus, and send them back across the border. Let Mexico pay to feed and house them.
You are going to need a prison/holding center to deport 15million people man
Last night, someone I was talking to was outraged that the Supreme Court had ruled against Texas on this.aggiehawg said:LINKQuote:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a contentious new law that gives local police the power to arrest migrants.
The conservative-majority court, with three liberal justices dissenting, rejected an emergency request made by the Biden administration, which said states have no authority to legislate on immigration, an issue the federal government has sole authority over.
That means the law can go into effect while litigation continues in lower courts. It could still be blocked at a later date.
I hadn't heard of any decision and so I figured that he was confusing the Biden Administration's request with a Supreme Court ruling.
So it's not over yet since it could come back in the future, but for now, Texas can continue.
Texas conspiracy statute applies only to felonies, and this is a misdemeanor.txags92 said:Brings to mind an interesting question. If being here illegally is a crime, does that mean anybody facilitating them to get here or helping them stay is an accomplice to that crime? What are the penalties for that?Hoyt Ag said:
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.
Quote:
Sec. 15.02. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. (a) A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed:
(1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and
(2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement.
(b) An agreement constituting a conspiracy may be inferred from acts of the parties.
(c) It is no defense to prosecution for criminal conspiracy that:
(1) one or more of the coconspirators is not criminally responsible for the object offense;
(2) one or more of the coconspirators has been acquitted, so long as two or more coconspirators have not been acquitted;
(3) one or more of the coconspirators has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different offense, or is immune from prosecution;
(4) the actor belongs to a class of persons that by definition of the object offense is legally incapable of committing the object offense in an individual capacity; or
(5) the object offense was actually committed.
(d) An offense under this section is one category lower than the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy, and if the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy is a state jail felony, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. This subsection does not apply to an offense under Section 76.02.
Great news! And yet, I struggle with the concept that a state had to take the federal government to the SCOTUS fighting for their right to enforce the law. That's about as un-American and as far away from our Constitutionally enumerated powers as you could possibly get.
FJB, FBO, and F all those who support these would be one-party dictators
FJB, FBO, and F all those who support these would be one-party dictators
Coincidentally.
A good friend of mine, also a client, called me earlier today from Eagle Pass. He's a director level with one of the largest construction companies in North America. Asked him what the hell he was doing on the border and he said "building the wall baby". I scoffed and asked who was paying for it. He said State of Texas, they just got awarded a huge section that Texas is funding.
Quite the timing of that call.
A good friend of mine, also a client, called me earlier today from Eagle Pass. He's a director level with one of the largest construction companies in North America. Asked him what the hell he was doing on the border and he said "building the wall baby". I scoffed and asked who was paying for it. He said State of Texas, they just got awarded a huge section that Texas is funding.
Quite the timing of that call.
Questions:
1. How long can they be detained on such a charge?
2. Can we deport?
1. How long can they be detained on such a charge?
2. Can we deport?
So which is better/easier, changing the law to make it apply to misdemeanors also? Or changing the law to make being here illegally a felony?Antoninus said:Texas conspiracy statute applies only to felonies, and this is a misdemeanor.txags92 said:Brings to mind an interesting question. If being here illegally is a crime, does that mean anybody facilitating them to get here or helping them stay is an accomplice to that crime? What are the penalties for that?Hoyt Ag said:
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.Quote:
Sec. 15.02. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. (a) A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed:
(1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and
(2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement.
(b) An agreement constituting a conspiracy may be inferred from acts of the parties.
(c) It is no defense to prosecution for criminal conspiracy that:
(1) one or more of the coconspirators is not criminally responsible for the object offense;
(2) one or more of the coconspirators has been acquitted, so long as two or more coconspirators have not been acquitted;
(3) one or more of the coconspirators has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different offense, or is immune from prosecution;
(4) the actor belongs to a class of persons that by definition of the object offense is legally incapable of committing the object offense in an individual capacity; or
(5) the object offense was actually committed.
(d) An offense under this section is one category lower than the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy, and if the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy is a state jail felony, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. This subsection does not apply to an offense under Section 76.02.
And on taco Tuesday to boot!
1. It is a misdemeanor, and most misdemeanor defendants are released on bond pending a trial setting. It will be interesting to see whether County Courts at Law will be granting bail for these defendants, and where they set the bail. If convicted, the max sentence is 6 months.IndividualFreedom said:
Questions:
1. How long can they be detained on such a charge?
2. Can we deport?
2. Only if they are convicted and after they serve their sentence.
I posted the statute above.
When can we start making citizen's arrests?
Cue Gomer.
Cue Gomer.
I feel so much better since about 11 a.m. CT on 20 Jan. 2025
This country would be so much better if we went back to a republic governed mostly by the states with a small federal government instead of a central federal government funded by the states.agent-maroon said:
Great news! And yet, I struggle with the concept that a state had to take the federal government to the SCOTUS fighting for their right to enforce the law. That's about as un-American and as far away from our Constitutionally enumerated powers as you could possibly get.
FJB, FBO, and F all those who support these would be one-party dictators
I don't know which would be easier, but I'm in favor of the latter.
If you're not a citizen, legal resident, or temp on a work/student visa, GTFO. Your anchor baby can come back when they're 18 unless you want to leave them with family that are citizens or legal residents.
If you're not a citizen, legal resident, or temp on a work/student visa, GTFO. Your anchor baby can come back when they're 18 unless you want to leave them with family that are citizens or legal residents.
F'n A, dude, f'n A.txags92 said:
This country would be so much better if we went back to a republic governed mostly by the states with a small federal government instead of a central federal government funded by the states.
Yeah, they keep voting for people that do things they claim to oppose. Weird.BadMoonRisin said:Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:So is the Supreme Court evil or good now? It seems to switch with every decision they make.aggiehawg said:LINKQuote:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to enforce a contentious new law that gives local police the power to arrest migrants.
The conservative-majority court, with three liberal justices dissenting, rejected an emergency request made by the Biden administration, which said states have no authority to legislate on immigration, an issue the federal government has sole authority over.
That means the law can go into effect while litigation continues in lower courts. It could still be blocked at a later date.
For the record, I like this decision but it shouldn't be necessary.
Shouldn't be neccesary. Wow! We agree on something.
Wait until you find out who filed suit to get it to SCOTUS. Your mind might be absolutely blown.
(You voted for him)
I suspect that the Ledge would balk at expanding "conspiracy" to all misdemeanors, so probably the latter given the makeup of the Ledge.txags92 said:So which is better/easier, changing the law to make it apply to misdemeanors also? Or changing the law to make being here illegally a felony?Antoninus said:Texas conspiracy statute applies only to felonies, and this is a misdemeanor.txags92 said:Brings to mind an interesting question. If being here illegally is a crime, does that mean anybody facilitating them to get here or helping them stay is an accomplice to that crime? What are the penalties for that?Hoyt Ag said:
Exactly. if you want this invasion to stop, shut down the NGOs facilitating it. Until then, its not going to stop.Quote:
Sec. 15.02. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. (a) A person commits criminal conspiracy if, with intent that a felony be committed:
(1) he agrees with one or more persons that they or one or more of them engage in conduct that would constitute the offense; and
(2) he or one or more of them performs an overt act in pursuance of the agreement.
(b) An agreement constituting a conspiracy may be inferred from acts of the parties.
(c) It is no defense to prosecution for criminal conspiracy that:
(1) one or more of the coconspirators is not criminally responsible for the object offense;
(2) one or more of the coconspirators has been acquitted, so long as two or more coconspirators have not been acquitted;
(3) one or more of the coconspirators has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different offense, or is immune from prosecution;
(4) the actor belongs to a class of persons that by definition of the object offense is legally incapable of committing the object offense in an individual capacity; or
(5) the object offense was actually committed.
(d) An offense under this section is one category lower than the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy, and if the most serious felony that is the object of the conspiracy is a state jail felony, the offense is a Class A misdemeanor. This subsection does not apply to an offense under Section 76.02.
Remember, too, that this misdemeanor will be enforced by local, elected prosecutors. Some won't.
Since they can all legally have weapons the deportations could get interesting.
Build It said:
Since they can all legally have weapons the deportations could get interesting.
hope they resist
Another reminder how important it is that Dade Phelan is defeated.
Why? He supported the bill.nortex97 said:
Another reminder how important it is that Dade Phelan is defeated.
I generally am okay with the way this is presented. Questions for those that know more about the law:
1) Is some sort of probable cause required to stop someone? How do they determine one is here illegally?
2) is there any carve out for DREAMers? I still strongly believe there should be.
1) Is some sort of probable cause required to stop someone? How do they determine one is here illegally?
2) is there any carve out for DREAMers? I still strongly believe there should be.
We needed Attorney General Paxton to get this done. We need more changes to expand/specify more to arrest and deport.Antoninus said:Why? He supported the bill.nortex97 said:
Another reminder how important it is that Dade Phelan is defeated.
Phelan will always try to undermine the people of Texas and work with traitorous Democrats. That's why.
Having read their full opinion, it turns out Barrett and Kavanaugh voted to not stay SB4 on procedural grounds.
They want to give the 5th Circuit more time to decide if the 5th Circuit is going to keep an administrative stay. (In short, this case is in a really unique procedural place.)
So, "stay tuned."
They want to give the 5th Circuit more time to decide if the 5th Circuit is going to keep an administrative stay. (In short, this case is in a really unique procedural place.)
So, "stay tuned."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/23A814Quote:
Before this Court intervenes on the emergency docket, the Fifth Circuit should be the first mover: It should apply the Nken factors and decide the motion for a stay pending appeal. It can presumably do so promptly. Texas's motion for a stay pending appeal was fully briefed in the Fifth Circuit by March 5, almost two weeks ago. Merits briefing on Texas's challenge to the District Court's injunction of S. B. 4 is currently underway. If a decision does not issue soon, the applicants may return to this Court.
Featured Stories
See All
5:29
2h ago
2.7k
13:44
57m ago
1.3k
Showdown sweep surges Texas A&M into D1Baseball's top 10
by Richard Zane
Dement homers twice to complete sweep in Oxford
by Kayla Gaither
13:25
1d ago
12k