factbat.com

The powers of the Federal Government of the United States are not expressly that which grant them sole discretion to inexorably decide immigration policy, nor exclusive responsibility as regards enforcement of such.

The United States Congress is granted the power, under the Constitution;

• To ‘lay taxes’.
• Borrow money.
• Regulate commerce.
• Establish uniform rules of naturalization (not immigration).
• Coin and regulate the value of money & fix the standard of weights and measures.
• Provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the money or securities of the U.S..
• Establish post offices and post roads.
• Limit times to authors’ and inventors’ exclusive rights to writings and discoveries.
• Constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.
• Define and punish piracy.
• Declare war and make rules regarding capture of enemies.
• Raise and support armies, with appropriated revenues for that use lasting no longer than two years.
• Provide and maintain a Navy.
• Make rules for governance of land and naval forces.
• Make provisions for calling forth the militia to execute the laws, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.
• Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and governing those portions used in service to the United States, but reserving to the Sates the appointment of Officers and Authorities.
• To exercise exclusive legislation over the seat of government and those areas purchased by consent of the Legislature of the State where such areas are located, for the erection of “needful buildings.
• To make all laws necessary and proper for executing the above mentioned powers, and all other powers vested to the government by the Constitution.
• The power to declare the punishment of treason.
• Prescribe the manner in which public acts, records and proceedings shall be approved, whereby full faith and credit shall be given in each State to those of every other State.
• Admit new states to the Union (But not within any state without consent of that state, its citizens and concurrent congress).
• Have the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the U.S.; however, nothing in the Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the U.S. or of any particular State.
• Propose amendments to the Constitution whenever two thirds of both houses shall agree to do so -- as stipulated by the 5^th Article of the Constitution. Providing no amendment deprives any state equal suffrage in the Senate, or, prior to 1808, in any way affects the 1^st and 4^th clauses of the 9^th section of the 1^st article. The preamble to the Bill of Rights preceded all subsequent amendments in the Constitution and drafted those amendments expressly pursuant to the 5^th Article. (strangely enough the 16^th amendment is in clear violation of both this founding provision, and the Bill of Rights, thus the U.S. “income tax” is illegal and unconstitutional in myriad contexts)

Furthermore, Article 4 Section 4 Paragraph 1 say’s “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive…against domestic violence.”

There is nothing in the Constitution which grants the federal government any power to preempt the prerogatives of any state as regards immigration laws or their enforcement. Neither is there any provision which is meant to require the federal government to prevent any state of the union from enacting any legislation or law which complies with the Constitution.

However, Article 1 of Section 9 did provide some stipulation as to the limits of congressional oversight concerning Congress’ authority to effect the migration among states prior to 1808, wherein it states “The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress…”

Furthermore, the federal government is constrained in its authority over any legal action by any state, whereby in Article 1 Section 10 paragraph 3 it states “No State shall, without the consent of Congress…engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.”

This clearly shows that if there is any environment of imminent dangers being cultivated in any state, and whereby any state is subject to “invasion” by said dangers, and due to a lack or inability of the federal government to act in protection of that state, such state is thereby granted the power to; not only enact legislation to prevent such dangers, but to engage in all out War in defense of its citizens against said dangers.

Arizona is without a doubt a State of this Union which has been placed in imminent danger, propagated by invasion of which the Federal Government is either incapable, or unwilling to address, and thereby Arizona has every right, and yea, every duty to lawfully engage this real and present threat upon its sovereign citizenry.

The sovereignty of any State resides in the people thereof, and all writs and processes shall issue in their name.

Whereby the United States Government is that which is created of, for and by the people, this government’s accountability is first and foremost to said people, of whom are those which alone shall grant or rescind any and all such powers to this government, as enunciated numerous times in the Constitution.

A government which is granted powers by the people, is therefore equally constrained by the people. And any attempt to circumvent said powers or employ deception, perfidious acts, riotous speech or frivolous litigations injurious to these states and any constitutionally binding legislation, is an act of insubordination.

Any frivolous lawsuit filed by the Obama administration should be met with a countersuit for damages concordant with said administration’s “breach of the peace”, and obvious contempt for the rule of law in this nation.

The accusations being made by the Obama administration are in blatant disregard for the sovereignty of this nation and its citizens, and must be clearly defined, enumerated and prosecuted under constitutionally sanctioned indictment by the grand juries of any and all states which shall be affected by this administration's blatant disregard for this country’s founding principles, as clearly outlined by the United States Constitution which inexplicably sustains them.

As to the relevance of immigration reform, or arguments which claim that children born in this country to illegal aliens are thereby citizens according to the 14^th amendment. The fact is that this amendment clearly states multiple stipulations to such, enunciated by the provision that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens…”

What must be understood is that those born to illegal aliens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, since they are not citizens of this nation, and are but offspring of a criminal element that is subject to deportation to whatever nation does hold jurisdiction over them.

A person who is simply born in this nation absent any pre-existing citizenship, is not subject to its jurisdiction, and therefore no such citizenship can be expected to devolve on said person. International laws governing "diplomatic immunity" preclude the children of illegal aliens from any expectation of citizenry as they are also not subject to United States jurisdiction.

This is a critical national sentiment, crafted within the United States Constitution, which has initiated the drafting of many reasonable demands throughout this nation’s founding documents; everything from origin of birth requirements for all presidential candidates to the prohibition of titles of nobility.

The immigration crises that this nation is now harangued with is one reason why the individual sovereignty of the citizenry is imperative to its survival, in that it enables a defoliation of that which seeks to grow in a grafted fashion within its borders, while veiling its true intentions at the behest of a tyrannical government.

Surprisingly enough, this government now brazenly lauds its intentions of authoritarian rule and subversion, attacking this nation's sovereignty with utter abandon, and openly working in tandem with a congress compelled by demands from foreign entities expecting to force upon this citizenry unreasonable reform under the Obama Administration which now openly colludes with Mexican President Calderon hoping to circumvent historical national policy.

The 10^th Amendment say’s “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Clearly, the founding fathers considered the federal government to be subordinated to the States in every way.

As for California and other states enacting ordinances which seek to boycott the state of Arizona, this is in clear violation of the Constitution, which states in Article 1 Section 9 Paragraph 6 “No preference shall be given by any regulations of commerce or revenue to the ports of one state over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another.”

California has called for, and imposed, legislative policies which show obvious “preference” for “commerce and revenue” to one state over another. And this is in blatant violation of the Supreme Law of this Land, and should be prosecuted as such.

Furthermore, in Article 1 Section 10 Paragraph 1 it clearly provides prohibition of countless aforementioned disparities when stating “No state shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation (or) grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal…”.

California, and any of its “sanctuary cities” are engaging in an “alliances” and or “treaties” of which they have no authority nor jurisdiction to enter into. Moreover, those cities that are boycotting Arizona are also in violation of the law which prohibits granting “Letters of Reprisal.”

To be clear, a letter of Marque or Reprisal is that which posits to act outside of the jurisdiction of one state for the express intent of causing injury to those residing in any other state beyond its jurisdiction, under the guise that the imposing state has been damaged in some way by the actions of the other. Thus this form of document has historically been that which is drafted absent any oversight, and without judicial sanction, and is expressly egregious both legally and morally, and is thereby prohibited in respect of the rule of law in this nation.

The Constitutional authorities which support SB1070, and the actions being implemented by the State Government in Arizona, are clearly documented and irrefutable. And Jan Brewer, Arizona’s governor, should be commended for her indefatigable dedication to the sovereign citizens of her State. And for standing up to the Obama administration, including Obama himself, which has vehemently attacked her repeatedly; both in the press and in the Oval Office.

As for the despotic and ignorant legislators in California -- or any other state -- intent on illegally attacking Arizona under the color of law, and who by and large appear to be anything but Americans, they will eventually be held accountable for their insubordination and insurrection…mark my words.