Speaking of virtual Nazi government states

[Value Buy]

We do not have to worry about Nazi/skinhead Federal government policies. We have states doing these policies publicly, telling corporations if you work with Federal Ice agents we are coming after you.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-ag-we-will-prosecute-employers-who-violate-sanctuary-laws/ar-AAuSfyV?li=BBnb7Kz

Hmmn, does a corporation work with the Federal government agency or the state government?
Do we have states now seceding from the Union without publicly saying so?
Are we in a Civil War again, or do we let Mexico annex California's since it's public officials now seem to be acting as proxies of Mexico's newest state?

[Tennesseer]

Jan 19, 2018 8:23:47 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

We do not have to worry about Nazi/skinhead Federal government policies. We have states doing these policies publicly, telling corporations if you work with Federal Ice agents we are coming after you.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-ag-we-will-prosecute-employers-who-violate-sanctuary-laws/ar-AAuSfyV?li=BBnb7Kz

Hmmn, does a corporation work with the Federal government agency or the state government?
Do we have states now seceding from the Union without publicly saying so?
Are we in a Civil War again, or do we let Mexico annex California's since it's public officials now seem to be acting as proxies of Mexico's newest state?

Had it happened in Nazi Germany, it would have been akin to individual German states telling its corporations not to report Jews working for them so as to protect the Jews from deportation and worse.


Aren't you for states rights?

[Value Buy]

Jan 19, 2018 10:19:14 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Jan 19, 2018 8:23:47 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

We do not have to worry about Nazi/skinhead Federal government policies. We have states doing these policies publicly, telling corporations if you work with Federal Ice agents we are coming after you.

www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-ag-we-will-prosecute-employers-who-violate-sanctuary-laws/ar-AAuSfyV?li=BBnb7Kz

Hmmn, does a corporation work with the Federal government agency or the state government?
Do we have states now seceding from the Union without publicly saying so?
Are we in a Civil War again, or do we let Mexico annex California's since it's public officials now seem to be acting as proxies of Mexico's newest state?

Had it happened in Nazi Germany, it would have been akin to individual German states telling its corporations not to report Jews working for them so as to protect the Jews from deportation and worse.


Aren't you for states rights?

Color me borderline on state's rights.
I did not believe in "separate but equal" state laws because frankly they were never "equal".
I do believe in the right of a state to allow religious monuments on state grounds if they want it.
Color me conflicted.
I do not believe Federal Government had the right to bus students out of their actual school system to other districts unrelated to their school system for equal education opportunities, rather than forcing the original school system to enrich their system to the proper standards.
I do believe in small business right's to refuse service on religious grounds, but not national corporations, although I am not sure any states ever enacted such laws, before the great cake wars.
I do follow the Constitutional right of the Federal Government to follow Federal law, and the states should not interfere with it.
Isn't this why we fought the Civil War when you get right down to it?
I guess I flip flop and will never become President!

[tallguy]

I'd have to think about this one.  While I do support sanctuary cities in principle because there are greater priorities put at risk if people are afraid to come forward for fear of deportation, I don't think I would support this.  Enforcing immigration statutes is the responsibility of the federal government.  While I might consider it appropriate for a state to shelter private companies from being compelled to cooperate, I can't support companies being forbidden to cooperate.

From the Act:

7285.1. (a) Except as otherwise required by federal law, an employer, or a person acting on behalf of the employer, shall not provide voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to enter any nonpublic areas of a place of labor. This section does not apply if the immigration enforcement agent provides a judicial warrant.
-----------------------------
7285.2. (a) (1) Except as otherwise required by federal law, and except as provided in paragraph (2), an employer, or a person acting on behalf of the employer, shall not provide voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to access, review, or obtain the employer’s employee records without a subpoena or judicial warrant. This section does not prohibit an employer, or person acting on behalf of an employer, from challenging the validity of a subpoena or judicial warrant in a federal district court.
-----------------------------
7285.3. In accordance with state and federal law, nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted, construed, or applied to restrict or limit an employer’s compliance with a memorandum of understanding governing the use of the federal E-Verify system.
-----------------------------
90.2. (a) (1) Except as otherwise required by federal law, an employer shall provide a notice to each current employee, by posting in the language the employer normally uses to communicate employment-related information to the employee, of any inspections of I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification forms or other employment records conducted by an immigration agency within 72 hours of receiving notice of the inspection. Written notice shall also be given within 72 hours to the employee’s authorized representative, if any.
-----------------------------
1019.2. (a) Except as otherwise required by federal law, a public or private employer, or a person acting on behalf of a public or private employer, shall not reverify the employment eligibility of a current employee at a time or in a manner not required by Section 1324a(b) of Title 8 of the United States Code. 

Ultimately, this is not as bad as made to appear:  Federal agents need to have a warrant, employers would still use E-Verify, workers would be provided notice of any inspections, and employers would have limited ability to recheck employment eligibility.  Still, the prohibition seems like an overreach. 

[djAdvocate]

like most of this sanctuary stuff, the hyperbole rarely squares with the facts.

[tallguy]

And unlike some others here, including some of our most prolific thread-starters, I rather deal with facts than the extremely hyperbolic.  One wonders what goes through their heads, if anything?  Or how many black holes a rational thought gets lost in inside?      

[dezii]

Jan 19, 2018 10:37:35 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Jan 19, 2018 10:19:14 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Had it happened in Nazi Germany, it would have been akin to individual German states telling its corporations not to report Jews working for them so as to protect the Jews from deportation and worse.


Aren't you for states rights?

Color me borderline on state's rights.
I did not believe in "separate but equal" state laws because frankly they were never "equal".
I do believe in the right of a state to allow religious monuments on state grounds if they want it.
Color me conflicted.
I do not believe Federal Government had the right to bus students out of their actual school system to other districts unrelated to their school system for equal education opportunities, rather than forcing the original school system to enrich their system to the proper standards.
I do believe in small business right's to refuse service on religious grounds, but not national corporations, although I am not sure any states ever enacted such laws, before the great cake wars.
I do follow the Constitutional right of the Federal Government to follow Federal law, and the states should not interfere with it.
Isn't this why we fought the Civil War when you get right down to it?
I guess I flip flop and will never become President!

"I do not believe Federal Government had the right to bus students out of their actual school system to other districts unrelated to their school system for equal education opportunities, rather than forcing the original school system to enrich their system to the proper standards."

Didn't we allow that? Called "separate but equal..."....allowed for decades...finally realized didn't work...believe highest court in the land ruled against that happening...wasn't done with out consequences...believe Nation Guard was called out...just to allow a couple of kids to enter school...

Something along those lines...been a while..facts a little fuzzy...Something about "Little Rock" "Falbus", "Wallace"....standing in a doorway.....running for President....someone getting shot...paralyzed...leading to civil rights laws....South being lost to Democrats..Dixiecrats...all jumbled up together...