February 11, 2011
— Ace ...resulting in huge costs due to an "invasion" of illegal immigrants.
The lawsuit claims the federal government has failed to protect Arizona from an "invasion" of illegal immigrants. It seeks increased reimbursements and extra safeguards, such as additional border fences.Brewer's court filing serves as a countersuit in the federal government's legal challenge to Arizona's new enforcement immigration law. The U.S. Justice Department is seeking to invalidate the law.
"Because the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona, I am left with no other choice," Brewer said as sign-carrying protesters yelled chants at her and at other champions of the immigration law.
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler declined to comment on the filing.
A flack for Obama said the suit was meritless and then, believe it or not, played the Patriotism Card -- he claimed that this suit "belittled" the "good men and women in uniform" on border duty.
Seriously?
I had an idea about that rancher being sued by illegal immigrants -- there's a type of lawsuit called a "reverse eminent domain" suit, where the plaintiff alleges that the government has taken his property without compensation, and without legally recognizing that they've taken it (or, actually, taken away his intangible rights to do with it as he wishes or his right to quiet enjoyment of it), and so sues the state to formally recognize this as a taking and so compensate him fairly under the Fifth Amendment.
The US government, through the courts, stripped this man of his right to quiet enjoyment of his property and to enjoy it solely. They have, essentially, created an easement (a legal right of way trumping the property owner's right) on the property for the use of illegal immigrants.
The government took part of his property for a federal illegal-immigrant throughway easement and he should sue to force them to compensate him.
Posted by: Ace at
08:19 AM
| Comments (120)
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.
Good. I've long wanted to see the Govt. justify abrogating one of their most basic responsibilities.
Posted by: Lincolntf at February 11, 2011 08:22 AM (xMT+4)
Acutally, Napolitano said, "A secure border doesn't necessarily mean a sealed border."
I shit you not; that's what she said.
Posted by: Soothsayerwing Plover at February 11, 2011 08:22 AM (uFokq)
I shit you not; that's what she said.
Posted by: Soothsayerwing Plover at February 11, 2011 12:22 PM (uFokq)
Could this fucking woman be any dumber?
Posted by: Hedgehog at February 11, 2011 08:24 AM (Rn2kl)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at February 11, 2011 08:25 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: Lincolntf at February 11, 2011 08:26 AM (xMT+4)
Acutally, Napolitano said, "A secure border doesn't necessarily mean a sealed border."
Did Napolitano say what secured border meant? I'm betting NO. Her arguments are similar in quality to what you get from trolls on blogs.
Posted by: Speller at February 11, 2011 08:27 AM (J74Py)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 11, 2011 08:28 AM (1fB+3)
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 08:28 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: kathysaysso at February 11, 2011 08:29 AM (ZtwUX)
Her implication was that we have 'control' over almost every single mile of our Northern and Southern borders.
Posted by: Soothsayerwing Plover at February 11, 2011 08:30 AM (uFokq)
Posted by: Roadking at February 11, 2011 08:33 AM (JzKy8)
You know, I'm getting so sick and tired of our current administration and the way they are destroying America from within. The sad thing is, I think it's going to be 6 years not 2 years before we will be rid of the scourge that is Obama. I am completely exhausted as I helplessly watch our great Republic go down the tubes.
Posted by: runningrn at February 11, 2011 08:33 AM (ihSHD)
Posted by: Box of Rocks at February 11, 2011 08:35 AM (b6qrg)
Baby steps.
Heh. Rush is bitch-slapping Barry right now.
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 08:36 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: Have Blue at February 11, 2011 08:37 AM (mV+es)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 11, 2011 08:37 AM (0GFWk)
Posted by: nevergiveup at February 11, 2011 12:37 PM (0GFWk)
But do you have popcorn and valu-Rite?
Posted by: Hrothgar at February 11, 2011 08:39 AM (DCpHZ)
>>> Yes on the san serif. Weird.
And a little slower as well? Takes awhile to scroll.
Ace - you slowed my scroll.
Posted by: Roadking at February 11, 2011 08:39 AM (JzKy8)
Anyone else seeing the front page of the blog san serif?
I figured it was some "sand serif" support-for-Egypt thingie.
Or a fuck up.
Posted by: Mama AJ at February 11, 2011 08:39 AM (XdlcF)
Section 4 - Republican government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
I've been waiting for Arizona to figure this one out. Its TWO issues...
1. Protect the against Invasion.
2. Upon application of the Legislature or of the Executive AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
And on a side note, the exact same "clause" of the Consitution which gives the Congress the power to make and enforce Immigration law, ALSO says that all bankruptcy laws shall be uniform... yet... go look at what some states exclude in bankruptcy proceedings... its different from State to State...
Posted by: Romeo13 at February 11, 2011 08:40 AM (AdK6a)
Posted by: maddogg at February 11, 2011 08:41 AM (OlN4e)
Yeah, it kinda looks like it "loads" twice in rapid succession.
Posted by: Lincolntf at February 11, 2011 08:41 AM (xMT+4)
Posted by: Have Blue at February 11, 2011 08:41 AM (mV+es)
Anyone else seeing the front page of the blog san serif?
I figured it was some "sand serif" support-for-Egypt thingie.
Or a fuck up.
Posted by: Mama AJ at February 11, 2011 12:39 PM (XdlcF)
What... Sand's in town?
Posted by: The Spirit at February 11, 2011 08:42 AM (AdK6a)
The sad thing is, I think it's going to be 6 years not 2 years before we will be rid of the scourge that is Obama.
Hold fast. There is an outside chance that we could take the Senate in 2012 even if The Vapid One™ manages to get reimmaculated.
Just think of the fun we could have if we had large enough majorities in Congress to turn it into a veto-overriding machine, rendering him a lame-duck president for four years.
I could open a container of pudding just at the thought of it...
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 11, 2011 08:43 AM (b6qrg)
>>> I restlessly await an end of The Era of Stupidity, in this country.
The Era of Stupidity = Smart Power
The Era of Stupidity = Adults in Charge
The Era of Stupidity = Etc, etc....
Posted by: Roadking at February 11, 2011 08:43 AM (JzKy8)
Posted by: t-bird at February 11, 2011 08:43 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: BackAsswards at February 11, 2011 08:44 AM (OCO/h)
Oooooh Pretty Fires.
Where's my fiddle?
Posted by: MīcÞeMūß at February 11, 2011 08:44 AM (0q2P7)
New Font. Really ties the room together.
Posted by: garrett at February 11, 2011 08:44 AM (XgJoj)
It is the equivalent of "we'll double your order, you pay only shipping and handling".
Posted by: pep at February 11, 2011 08:46 AM (3ll0O)
We could encircle Mubarack in the White House and chant "Get Out! Get Out!" in Egyptian.
"No Barky, No Jarret, No Jizya!"
Posted by: garrett at February 11, 2011 08:46 AM (XgJoj)
Posted by: that guy who never underestimates the power of Teh Stupid at February 11, 2011 08:47 AM (uPUfN)
Just think of the fun we could have if we had large enough majorities in Congress to turn it into a veto-overriding machine, rendering him a lame-duck president for four years.
Yeh, but look at all the international fuck ups and corruption he and his cronies are accomplishing. Congress couldn't do much to stop that.
Posted by: Mama AJ at February 11, 2011 08:50 AM (XdlcF)
If you get there, you impeach his ass.
Posted by: grognard at February 11, 2011 08:55 AM (NS2Mo)
Posted by: BackAsswards at February 11, 2011 08:56 AM (OCO/h)
Ooh, I'd like some of those Congressmens doing things to my ass.
Posted by: Barack H. Obama, Man's Country Lifetime Member at February 11, 2011 08:56 AM (p05LM)
FTFY
Posted by: Armando at February 11, 2011 08:58 AM (nd0uY)
Posted by: La Raza at February 11, 2011 08:59 AM (93Qr2)
Congress couldn't do much to stop that.
I have to admit a bit of inexperience on my part, but I'm pretty sure that Congress could start stripping away some of the powers they have given presidents over the years.
I need to find a way to keep my own spirits up. I think it could work even though it might take a more concerted effort than conservatives summoned in 2010 to take the House. Quite a few senators are up for reelection in 2012, many of them Dims. Since many state houses went red this last time, redistricting could be one weapon in the arsenal.
I remain optimistic even though I expect no viable presidential candidate from the GOP. There are alternatives...
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at February 11, 2011 09:02 AM (b6qrg)
Even if AZ wins the court challenges that O'bumbles' Administration have presented, it still may be too late for AZ. Steyn brought up the point a few weeks ago that Hispanic kids make up the (or a near-) majority in AZ's schools.
Kids are the future, you know.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at February 11, 2011 09:02 AM (9hSKh)
Yes, the aggrieved rancher should counter-sue. He clearly has no property rights, largely as a result of the government failing to enforce its own laws.
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at February 11, 2011 09:03 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: t-bird at February 11, 2011 09:04 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at February 11, 2011 01:03 PM (bxiXv)
But none of those laws were written or approved by the Obama DoJ; hence, they have no validity and do not need to be enforced (unless they impact GE).
Posted by: Eric H Lawyer at large at February 11, 2011 09:06 AM (DCpHZ)
Posted by: mpfs at February 11, 2011 09:08 AM (iYbLN)
Well, speaking as an expert, the answer is no.
We concur with your well-reasoned opinion.
Posted by: Box of Rocks at February 11, 2011 12:35 PM
I concur
Posted by: stump at February 11, 2011 09:09 AM (6fm5i)
But none of those laws were written or approved by the Obama DoJ; hence, they have no validity and do not need to be enforced (unless they impact GE).
Posted by: Eric H Lawyer at large at February 11, 2011 01:06 PM (DCpHZ)
Yes, its just a law... its not like its somthing important like a Regulation!
Posted by: Eric Holder at February 11, 2011 09:10 AM (AdK6a)
Posted by: Barbarian at February 11, 2011 09:11 AM (EL+OC)
Well, speaking as an expert, the answer is no.
We concur with your well-reasoned opinion.
Posted by: Box of Rocks at February 11, 2011 12:35 PM
I concur
Posted by: stump at February 11, 2011 01:09 PM (6fm5i)
As do I.
Posted by: Post at February 11, 2011 09:11 AM (Rn2kl)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 09:13 AM (mfhdy)
Well, speaking as an expert, the answer is no.
We concur with your well-reasoned opinion.
Posted by: Box of Rocks at February 11, 2011 12:35 PM
I concur
Posted by: stump at February 11, 2011 01:09 PM (6fm5i)
Us too
Posted by: The 52% at February 11, 2011 09:13 AM (tf9Ne)
Posted by: Eric H Lawyer At Large at February 11, 2011 09:17 AM (DCpHZ)
Section 4.
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes, free logprof secular brotherhood at February 11, 2011 09:17 AM (xdHzq)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 09:18 AM (mfhdy)
Posted by: Guy Fawkes, free logprof secular brotherhood at February 11, 2011 01:17 PM (xdHzq)
Sorry--Looks like this was written at least a 100 years ago--Thus not applicable to today's issues.
Posted by: Eric H Lawyer At Large at February 11, 2011 09:19 AM (DCpHZ)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 09:21 AM (mfhdy)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at February 11, 2011 09:22 AM (P33XN)
The Presidency of the US should not be a candidate for the application of an OJT program.
Gee, I wish I had seen a resume of his capabilites and experience before I voted for him.
Posted by: Hrothgar Folder of History at February 11, 2011 09:23 AM (DCpHZ)
From the insightful essay-
" ...and this lack of discipline combined with the “flower children” of the sixties coming of age and grasping for power, would bring about a situation.."
There's nothing more pathetic than watching the Sixties holdovers who insisted "anything goes" during their younger decades introducing "zero tolerance" policies as they approach dotage. The most selfish, useless generation in US history will continue to beclown itself until the last hippie dipshit expires.
Posted by: Lincolntf at February 11, 2011 09:24 AM (xMT+4)
Clapp off- Mubarak is still in power.
The Clapper- The MFM is better than a spy network.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 11, 2011 09:26 AM (tf9Ne)
Oprah called on President Obama's critics on Friday to “show some level of respect.”
"I feel that everybody has a learning curve, and I feel that the reason why I was willing to step out for him was because I believed in his integrity and I believed in his heart," the influential TV host said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” in Chicago.
Of the negative mood of the country, Oprah added, “I think everybody complaining ought to try it for once.”
Yes, yes she did.
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 09:26 AM (UOM48)
Ah but they never exercised any responsibility in their prime, and zero tolerance (live by the rule book) is just an extension of that approach to life as quasi-adults.
After all, if the "rules" say this is the way to do it, how can anyone fault them for their actions.
Posted by: Hrothgar Folder of History at February 11, 2011 09:27 AM (DCpHZ)
“I think everybody complaining ought to try it for once.”
Oh, OK. I'll get right on that.
But I don't think you'll be happy with my time in office, Oprah.
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 11, 2011 09:30 AM (l3g1A)
A de facto easement. That's brilliant!
I would like to believe that this case would get traction in the courts.
Yes. I would like to believe that.
Posted by: Cluebat from Exodar at February 11, 2011 09:31 AM (JSetw)
Well, speaking as an expert, the answer is no.
We concur with your well-reasoned opinion.
Posted by: Box of Rocks at February 11, 2011 12:35 PM
I concur
Posted by: stump at February 11, 2011 01:09 PM (6fm5i)
The motion carries.
Posted by: Box of Hair at February 11, 2011 09:32 AM (0q2P7)
The most selfish, useless generation in US history will continue to beclown itself until the last hippie dipshit expires.
We weren't ALL like that, but yeah, I pretty much hate my generation.
But dayum, we sure made some great music.
Posted by: Muskwa at February 11, 2011 09:32 AM (DXa2e)
Yes, yes she did.
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 01:26 PM (UOM4
Uhhh... try what? being Negative? or trusting a Prooven Liars Integrity? I'm all confused...
Posted by: Romeo13 at February 11, 2011 09:33 AM (AdK6a)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 01:18 PM (mfhdy)
Remember the good times, back before the 2008 election, when everyone was pointing out what little the utter lack of executive experience Obama had, when situations like this Egypt fiasco were only a troubling forecast?
Posted by: NC Ref at February 11, 2011 09:33 AM (/izg2)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 09:34 AM (mfhdy)
Posted by: BackAsswards at February 11, 2011 09:34 AM (OCO/h)
Posted by: NC Ref at February 11, 2011 01:33 PM (/izg2)
What... who would say anything abou that? Wait, its 3 AM, why is the phone ringing??
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at February 11, 2011 09:35 AM (AdK6a)
Posted by: tcn at February 11, 2011 09:35 AM (DjPot)
Posted by: maddogg at February 11, 2011 09:36 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: BlackOrchid at February 11, 2011 12:25 PM (SB0V2)
I think we can be satisfied that magic carpet ain't bein ridden.
Posted by: rightzilla at February 11, 2011 09:37 AM (ujT7B)
I think we can be satisfied that magic carpet ain't bein ridden.
Posted by: rightzilla at February 11, 2011 01:37 PM (ujT7B)
Hard to say. Does she have a dog?
Posted by: maddogg at February 11, 2011 09:38 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: nerdygirl at February 11, 2011 09:38 AM (mfhdy)
Posted by: tcn at February 11, 2011 01:35 PM (DjPot)
But, after you shoot them, and hopefully shot to kill, you will face endless lawsuits brought against you by your local, state, and national "law enforcement "agencies. All in the name of fairness of course.
Posted by: Hrothgar Folder of History at February 11, 2011 09:40 AM (DCpHZ)
Payback's a bitch, Orca.
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 09:42 AM (UOM48)
He has a team of advisers that he picked for their knowledge and they all suck too.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 11, 2011 09:43 AM (tf9Ne)
So he was in no way qualified, and you though some OJT and a few serious mistakes with foriegn relations, the economy, and national security was OK? And half a term later you're still trying to give him the same bye?
Oprah:
He's the President. He's in the fucking big boys league now not the coddle league. Learning curve or no, he has to take is g-damn lumps just like every other President all the way back to Washington. Don't tell us to fucking shut up just because you like him. He's had two+ years to get comfy with the big chair before he grabbed that chicken and went to town. TWO YEARS! HALF A TERM! When can we expect him to be qualified!? AT WHAT POINT CAN WE HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE!?
Posted by: MīcÞeMūß at February 11, 2011 09:43 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: moki at February 11, 2011 09:44 AM (dZmFh)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at February 11, 2011 09:44 AM (SJ6/3)
Posted by: some dope at February 11, 2011 09:46 AM (K/USr)
Posted by: tcn at February 11, 2011 09:46 AM (DjPot)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at February 11, 2011 09:47 AM (SJ6/3)
Posted by: maddogg at February 11, 2011 09:49 AM (OlN4e)
What a pig.
Posted by: Jane D'oh, sez save logprof and nickless at February 11, 2011 09:50 AM (UOM48)
Geraghty:
Sen. John Thune's most recent ACU rating is 100 out of 100. Yet someone, somewhere, right now is dismissing him as a RINO
Anyone?
Posted by: dagny: Free Logprof damnit! at February 11, 2011 09:51 AM (l3g1A)
It's called doublethink
It lets you believe two contradicting realities at the same time.
It's integral to all sorts progressive beliefs.
Like Climate models are perfect so we should destroy our economy for them.
Climate models are flawed which explains the cold weather.
Christianity in America wants a theocracy, all of which are inherently bad.
Islam wants a theocracy and we should accept that as part of their culture.
Government needs to tell us what to eat because we are unhealthy.
Government shouldn't tell us we can't smoke pot even if its bad for us.
The list goes on and on.
Posted by: MīcÞeMūß at February 11, 2011 09:53 AM (0q2P7)
Can I finish my waffle now and just watch the damn game?
Posted by: Stitches the Clown at February 11, 2011 09:53 AM (93Qr2)
Posted by: moki at February 11, 2011 09:55 AM (dZmFh)
Posted by: BackAsswards at February 11, 2011 01:37 PM (OCO/h)
Wow, I haven't been called a racist since adopting my Mayan baby boy from Guatemala. The social workers reminded me of my "white privilege," whatever the heck that is. Essentially, I was told I was racist by definition.
Haven't been back to see those particular folks.
Posted by: tcn at February 11, 2011 09:55 AM (DjPot)
Ah, Obama the boy-king. I knew this would be a major meme.
Well, we don't have a hereditary monarchy, so the word Oprah wants is: incompetent.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 11, 2011 09:56 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: moki at February 11, 2011 09:59 AM (dZmFh)
Posted by: Preznit Sand Trap at February 11, 2011 10:02 AM (UOM48)
Posted by: MīcÞeMūß at February 11, 2011 10:03 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Toby the Beagle at February 11, 2011 10:06 AM (b6qrg)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at February 11, 2011 01:47 PM (SJ6/3)
Where do I apply? I'm over-qualified!
Posted by: NC Ref at February 11, 2011 10:14 AM (/izg2)
Posted by: Seriel Mom at February 11, 2011 10:50 AM (ujT7B)
Oprah added, “I think everybody complaining ought to try it for once.”
That statement is incoherent bad grammar.
Posted by: Speller at February 11, 2011 11:08 AM (J74Py)
Posted by: Curmudgeon at February 11, 2011 12:29 PM (ujg0T)
Posted by: Spurwing Plover at February 11, 2011 01:14 PM (vA9ld)
Posted by: JS at February 11, 2011 09:45 PM (NB4vc)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2981 seconds, 248 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Rick O'Connell at February 11, 2011 08:21 AM (M9Ie6)