Judge blocks portions of South Carolina immigration law
Tags: Judge, blocks, portions, South Carolina, immigration law, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!
|Blogs for Borders - Bloggers dedicated to American sovereignty, border security and a sane immigration policy. We support legal immigration. We share news, articles and opinions on issues related to our nation's borders, immigration policy, illegal aliens and amnesty proposals.
Free Email Subscription | Facebook Group
President Obama’s decision last year to send 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border may have been smart politics, but a growing number of skeptics say the deployment is an expensive and inefficient mission that has made little difference in homeland security.Naturally it would be tough to do a cost benefit analysis on this because some of the benefits of the patrols can't be measured, that certainly makes sense. None the less, that price tag is a bit scary. I still prefer some border patrol, and increased attempts to dissuade folks from coming here, but alas the courts have almost universally struck down all efforts to remove the social net that lures people here. But, there is no accounting for the bravery of the folks who work there, as is made clear in this video:
Critics of the deployment include budget hawks, who say it is a waste of money, and residents here along the border, who say they are tired of seeing armed troops in their back yard.
Most of the criticism of the deployment focuses on its costs and benefits. The 1,200 National Guard troops have helped Border Patrol agents apprehend 25,514 illegal immigrants at a cost of $160 million — or $6,271 for each person caught.
“As a mayor, I am not going to say we don’t want more security. But as a taxpayer? I would say something different,” said John David Franz, mayor of Hidalgo, in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley.
Proponents of the mission stress that the guardsmen serve as a deterrent to drug smugglers and illegal immigrants — a role that is impossible to measure in dollars.
Granting financial preference to illegal aliens also discriminates against otherwise qualified citizen students from outside the state. Furthermore, states that offer in-state tuition to illegal aliens act as a magnet for more illegal aliens to come to the state. Arguments to the contrary are unpersuasive, and not supported by the facts.The core issue, though, is the Constitution and the rule of law. And while the United States welcomes immigrants, it is also a country of laws, and there are limits imposed on those who seek citizenship. States cannot cast aside those laws where they see fit, as von Spakovsky and Stimson explain:
Americans take pride in their heritage and this country’s generous policies regarding legal immigration. Yet, as citizens of a sovereign nation, Americans retain the right to decide who can and cannot enter this country—and what terms immigrants and visitors must accept as a condition of residing in the United States. As mandated by the U.S. Constitution, Congress sets America’s immigration policy. State officials have considerable influence in Congress over the crafting of immigration laws, and they may take steps to help enforce federal law. However, state officials cannot act contrary to a congressional statute.The Supreme Court has held that "The states have no power, by taxation or otherwise, to retard, impede, burden, or in any manner control, the operations of the constitutional laws enacted by Congress to carry into execution the powers vested in the general government." Unfortunately, in offering illegal aliens in-state tuition in violation of federal law, that is exactly what these states are doing. Now it is up to the President and the Attorney General to enforce that law and take action against these 12 states.