Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do you think Morton is right, or not, when he says

that ICE will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona officials. The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach, not a patchwork of state laws, he said.

"I don't think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution," Morton said.

He also said it wasn't good government to do this. What do you think?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-immigration-laws-chicago-20100519,0,6582417.story

 
29again

Asked by 29again at 2:16 PM on May. 21, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 27 (31,176 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (11)
  • How does Obama's policies on II differ from GW's? I asked this question last week and no one could provide 1 piece of evidence that GW did anything to counter the process. Why are you bothered, if nothing has changed?

    Something has changed. Obama has promised (in order to get elected) to radically change our immigration laws. He has no interest in "making a criminal out of people who are just looking for a job.' Well, we aren't making them the criminals, they did that themselves. I feel he makes a mockery out of our LEGAL immigrants who paid thousands of dollars to come here, by wishing to grant those who have no regards to our laws a free ride.


    Has his "immigration reform" happened yet? no, but that doesn't mean his official stand on the situation doesn't poss me off.
    lovinangels

    Answer by lovinangels at 10:56 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • I agree. I do not think the AZ law will decrease overall II into the US for the obvious reasons. However, I do think the law will help with the overt criminals who according to reports, are problematic in Southern AZ. If the goal is to reduce II into the US then the feds need to step up and protect ALL borders from ALL potential intruders-in the SW, NE, FL, All the along North, all coastal zones and at the airports.


    This bill is a band-aid cure for a severed carotid artery.

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 2:31 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • Yes, it should be a federal job to protect our federal borders, but I can't believe he's saying he's not going to do the federal job just because the referrals are going to be coming from a state he doesn't agree with...and then he wonders why states are trying to come up with their own patch jobs.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:41 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • If the federal government did their job, the states wouldn't have to step up and DO IT FOR THEM.
    chelleybeans

    Answer by chelleybeans at 2:52 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • Excerpt form an interview with the mayor of Phoenix on NPR yesterday:

    "this law unfortunately, I believe, will lead to racial profiling and picking out people because of their race, just by the nature of the law that really doesn't purport to give guidelines and certainly won't make us any safer. All it does is take police officers off the street going after violent criminals and now is going to require a lot of time and a lot of money to go after individuals that are working in hotels or picking the food that we eat in our daily meals. "

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127018725

    That would be a concern to me; while I think that they SHOULD enforce the federal law I don't want officers being distracted from their main job, either.

    gdiamante

    Answer by gdiamante at 3:26 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • I can't believe what this President and his administration have brought this Country to. It's a sick shame, almost unbelievable.
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 3:27 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • I can't believe what this President and his administration have brought this Country to. It's a sick shame, almost unbelievable.


     How does Obama's policies on II differ from GW's? I asked this question last week and no one could provide 1 piece of evidence that GW did anything to counter the process. Why are you bothered, if nothing has changed?

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 3:32 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • If the federal government did their job, the states wouldn't have to step up and DO IT FOR THEM.

    Exactly. The AZ law is the enforcement of the federal law, which the feds wouldn't do.
    Laura2U

    Answer by Laura2U at 3:59 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • How does Obama's policies on II differ from GW's? I asked this question last week and no one could provide 1 piece of evidence that GW did anything to counter the process. Why are you bothered, if nothing has changed?

    I was angered that Bush did nothing. It is all about the vote for BOTH parties.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 4:11 PM on May. 21, 2010

  • How does Obama's policies on II differ from GW's? I asked this question last week and no one could provide 1 piece of evidence that GW did anything to counter the process. Why are you bothered, if nothing has changed?
    ---
    Along this line of thought.............would those who are so against this law in AZ be more accepting of it if GWB were in charge? I don't see what it matters about WHO the pres is. The fact is that NO pres has done anything about this for decades, for whatever reason.
    29again

    Answer by 29again at 4:25 PM on May. 21, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN