I believe you are representative of a lot of the general public who are citizens or legal immigrants. Illegal immigration is a top priority for Americans. Everywhere we turn, the rights of illegal immigrants are being put before the rights of legal immigrants and citizens. Even if the citizenry votes for a law which tries to stop illegal immigration, some ultra far left liberal judge strips them of their vote. The reaction is that we get madder and madder and more vocal.

This issue is not going away and it’s going to get nastier until and unless those who RULE US listen to those WHO ELECTED THEM.

Left by Dianne on October 25th, 2007 at 11:44 am

Right on..!! I second that totally. It’s these psycho left wing judges that are the problem…time and time again the people vote for something, and time and time again these traitors overturn it..That’s insane, but mostly it’s not American..we the people should be heard, and our voices DO matter. What we want should be allowed to happen in this matter. We the people live in the real world, unlike all elected officials and judges who live behind gates I am sure, but we the people see this invasion first hand at our schools, hospitals, neighborhoods, malls, etc…we are being completly overrun. We are being made to feel like a stranger in our place of birth. And for what I keep asking myself???? for cheap goods? cheap labor? It’s not worth it. I would be more than happy to pay more for everything I buy to solve this problem. We managed just fine for 200 years without these law breakers and became a super power, won 2 world wars, invented things the likes never seen before..So I know things would be just fine if we had the will to stop this FLOOD once and for all.!

Left by Marc on October 25th, 2007 at 12:06 pm

It’s these psycho left wing judges that are the problem…

Do you even believe this stuff yourself?

11 of the last 13 Justices were nominated by Republicans and the makeup of the lower courts are hardly more Democratic. I think you can find more likely culprits for the current state of immigration law than the courts- namely the industries that want a steady flow of low cost labor and influence Washington to maintain it.

Left by Preston on October 25th, 2007 at 1:18 pm

Preston, you’re right. Both parties want to flood the country with illegle aliens.

Republicans want to please their big business contributors by delivering a huge supply of cheap labor, and many, like Hutchinson, feel the need to hold themselves out as Democrat-lites by pandering to the press and to people who will never vote Republican.

Democrats want to please their big Union contributors by delivering a huge supply of cheap labor who might join unions and thus pay dues. This is really crazy if you think about it, but we’re talking Democrats after all. And of course Democrats correctly believe that as the party that promises to always give you lots of free stuff, they will get all the votes of people who come the country to get as much free stuff as they can.

Left by Jim Howard on October 25th, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Democrats want to please their big Union contributors by delivering a huge supply of cheap labor who might join unions and thus pay dues.

Really? I have never heard this asserted. Unions run campaigns to organize low paid workers- including immigrants- but I have never heard that they put political pressure on the government to increase the flow of immigration.

Left by Preston on October 25th, 2007 at 3:01 pm

Preston is right in one sense. Bush didn’t change the judicial appointments that Clinton made except for a few recently for which he was severely challenged by the democrats. He should of fired them all (like Clinton did) and started with a clean slate. The end result is we have mostly Clinton appointees and THAT’s the problem.

Left by Dianne on October 25th, 2007 at 3:10 pm

Dianne-
Are you thinking about USA’s? Federal judges are appointed for life. In any case, they were Bush appointees too. USA’s hold 4 year appointments.

Left by Preston on October 25th, 2007 at 3:52 pm

Yes preston I do believe some of the judges we have in various states DO have an agenda. Be it their own or forced upon them by Bush or some other sell out. Have you never heard of cases where the voters vote for a proposition, then later a lone judge comes along and completely overturns the will of the people. This happens all the time. I forget the most recent issue it was gay marriage or the immigration issue. The people voted one way and one judge overturned their will. Don’t you find this disturbing at all?????? Do we the people have a say at all in the way we want things to be in our local community???? Or are you happy being dictated to someone who has no clue about the real world most of us live in. these judges probably have their health care and housing paid for, fat salaries, no fear of being fired, and I guarentee you they live in a rich area behind gates nice and safe from the chaos they thrust upon us every single time they impose their twisted will on us…you honestly want someone like that who is completely out of touch to throw out what a community says it wants???? You are OK with that??? I find it profoundly disturbing on every level.

Left by Marc on October 25th, 2007 at 8:05 pm

The people voted one way and one judge overturned their will. Don’t you find this disturbing at all??????

That’s not something I can say in the abstract: if the proposition was constitutional it should stand. If it wasn’t, it should be struck down.

We do have a nation of laws- something isn’t constitutional simply when you want it to be.

Left by Preston on October 25th, 2007 at 9:31 pm

The people voted one way and one judge overturned their will. Don’t you find this disturbing at all??????

I have one more thing to add. If you are sincere in your belief that the Court should not be invalidating the ‘will of the people’ you are supporting the wrong types of justices. Scalia is the Justice most likely to overturn governmental decisions and Thomas is the Justice most likely to motivated by partisan concerns in his decision. Justice Breyer on the other hand comes off well by these two criteria:

The Judicial Restraint Award, for the most humble exercise of judicial power, goes to Justice Stephen G. Breyer. Overall, he votes to uphold agency decisions more than four-fifths of the time. Notably, Breyer votes to uphold conservative decisions 64% of the time.

The Judicial Activism Award, for aggressive use of judicial power, goes to a most surprising winner: Justice Antonin Scalia. He upholds agency decisions only about half the time. This is an impressively low number. Under established principles, to which all members of the court subscribe, agencies are supposed to get the benefit of the doubt.

Left by Preston on October 26th, 2007 at 3:37 pm

Henh.
The judges that are the problem are in lower federal courts, and are activist liberals.
Any activist judge is a problem for the constitution, they are able to find all sorts of things in a copy of the constitution that we can’t see, like “privacy rights” that allow abortions.

Left by no2liberals on October 28th, 2007 at 9:30 am

So- in other words- ‘activism’ for things you don’t like.

Left by Preston on October 29th, 2007 at 7:01 am

Henh…no, Preston, not activism in the courts, but strict adherence to the Constitution.
I know it upsets lefties to no end, that their grip on the SCOTUS has ended, as they can never push their agenda on us through the legislative process, only through activist judges.

Left by no2liberals on October 30th, 2007 at 6:13 am