There are no illegal immigrants in America

[regular.joe]

Bottom line, after all the comas and "the"'s, immigration law is not unconstitutional in theory, or in practice. Radar, you should be a lawyer and start representing those who are currently considered illegal aliens. I'm sure they would appreciate your help and assistance.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here...maybe there should be an amendment that says, "congress has the power to regulate immigration". Are you arguing on principle here? Are you saying that we should not regulate immigration to our country? Bottom line is we should, and we do. It may not lie within the letter of the constitution, it certainly lies with the spirit and principle of the constitution.

What I really see with Radar is a man who intensely reveres the constitution and intensely distrusts the people elected by the process set up by the constitution. What a conflict. I'm not saying that all of our elected officials are worthy of trust. The process is worthy of trust. We have the power to remove them, or not, based on the constitution. Not only do we have to abide by the letter of the words written, the spirit of the document as well.

I'm going to include a list here of all sections of the United Sates Code that are unconstitutional, since there is no specific power granted to congress to regulate these areas.

TITLE 7 AGRICULTURE
TITLE 8 ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
TITLE 13 CENSUS
TITLE 16 CONSERVATION
TITLE 20 EDUCATION
TITLE 21 FOOD AND DRUGS
TITLE 23 HIGHWAYS
TITLE 24 HOSPITALS AND ASYLUMS
TITLE 29 LABOR
TITLE 30 MINERAL LANDS AND MINING
TITLE 42 THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
TITLE 43 PUBLIC LANDS
TITLE 49 TRANSPORTATION

Wow, why am I not in law school, I obviously belong there.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by regular.joe

Bottom line, after all the comas and "the"'s, immigration law is not unconstitutional in theory, or in practice. Radar, you should be a lawyer and start representing those who are currently considered illegal aliens. I'm sure they would appreciate your help and assistance.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here...maybe there should be an amendment that says, "congress has the power to regulate immigration". Are you arguing on principle here? Are you saying that we should not regulate immigration to our country? Bottom line is we should, and we do. It may not lie within the letter of the constitution, it certainly lies with the spirit and principle of the constitution.

What I really see with Radar is a man who intensely reveres the constitution and intensely distrusts the people elected by the process set up by the constitution. What a conflict. I'm not saying that all of our elected officials are worthy of trust. The process is worthy of trust. We have the power to remove them, or not, based on the constitution. Not only do we have to abide by the letter of the words written, the spirit of the document as well.

I'm going to include a list here of all sections of the United Sates Code that are unconstitutional, since there is no specific power granted to congress to regulate these areas.

TITLE 7 AGRICULTURE
TITLE 8 ALIENS AND NATIONALITY
TITLE 13 CENSUS
TITLE 16 CONSERVATION
TITLE 20 EDUCATION
TITLE 21 FOOD AND DRUGS
TITLE 23 HIGHWAYS
TITLE 24 HOSPITALS AND ASYLUMS
TITLE 29 LABOR
TITLE 30 MINERAL LANDS AND MINING
TITLE 42 THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE
TITLE 43 PUBLIC LANDS
TITLE 49 TRANSPORTATION

Wow, why am I not in law school, I obviously belong there.

Actually, the Constitution does grant congress power over making roads...postal roads to be specific, and a census so taxes can be apportioned according to the population.

Everything else on the list would be better off in private hands.

As far as whether or not I think immigration should be regulated, my personal opinion is that we should keep up our tradition of welcoming a free flow of immigrants with open arms. But at the very least we should not allow the federal government to regulate immigration unless the Constitution is amended to grant such powers to Congress. The same goes for everything else you mentioned.

Allowing the government to control any area not specifically granted to them by the Constitution is wrong. Also, it's good to keep in mind that the federal government wasn't meant to control these things. It was meant to involved in our lives as little as possible, to settle disputes among states, etc.

The states were meant to have power over other areas IF the people grant the state such powers, but neither the states, nor the fed should ever have any authority to limit or restrict our rights any more than the boundary of another person's equal rights.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Radar

As far as whether or not I think immigration should be regulated, my personal opinion is that we should keep up our tradition of welcoming a free flow of immigrants with open arms.

I was going to raise this when you folks were arguing about whether immigration could be construed as "invasion", but you all seemed busy.

Suppose the Chinese government has an agent reading the Cellar, and they realize that they can send people to the US at will. They start a program to send, say, 350 million people to the US over, say, 5 years. Huge ships carry massive numbers to the west coast where they are put on rafts and paddle themselves ashore.

They are completely unarmed, wave American flags as they wade ashore, avow no hostile intentions, obey the laws, totally swamp the local infrastructure, seek citizenship and voting rights ... and are arriving at about 70 million per year, and within five years will make up more than half of the population.

This example is very far fetched. I'm trying to illustrate the point that there comes a time when uncontrolled migration would be very bad for the receiving country and the people who are there now.
What would you do, Radar? Grit your teeth and keep holding the door open? Or limit immigration?
This is no longer a question about the constitution. Rather about what should be done.