Quote (Ghot @ 25 May 2018 00:42)
A border wall would be 1000 times more effective that California border ...guards.
/e just recently, a couple of hundred Central America refugees show up at the California border. Refugees that the President of the US said "You shall not pass".
What does California do... "Come on in".
the funny thing is that in the 90s, californians actually voted in favor of the anti-immigration proposition 187. and what happened? right, this happened:
Quote
After Judge Mariana Pfaelzer issued a permanent injunction of Proposition 187 in December 1994, blocking all provisions except those dealing with higher education and false documents, multiple cases were consolidated and brought before the federal court. In November 1997, Pfaelzer found the law to be unconstitutional on the basis that it infringed on the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration. Pfaelzer also explained that Proposition 187's effect on the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, the Congressional overhaul of the American welfare system, proved that the bill was a "scheme" to regulate immigration:
"California is powerless to enact its own legislative scheme to regulate immigration. It is likewise powerless to enact its own legislative scheme to regulate alien access to public benefits."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187so when it came to regulating or reducing illegal immigration, it was the - then liberal - federal government who had the exclusive right to control immigration according to californian judges. nowadays, according to the californian courts, the - now conservative - federal government is viewed as powerless to enact immigration regulations against the wishes of the - now liberal, pro-immigration - californian state.
so in either case, liberal californian judges considered the exlusive power over immigration to lie with the side who at the time was in favor of open borders and mass immigration. the fact that they had to flip their substantive stance by 180° over the last two decades to pull this off doesnt seem to bother anyone, even though the inconsistency is glaring.
it's absurd and a travesty.
This post was edited by Black XistenZ on May 24 2018 05:24pm