Cauthron says Plaintiffs likely to prevail (at this time).

Is this thread in English?

Tulsa World (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080604_1__Afede28706)

The plaintiff in this case is the US Chamber of Commerce plus some local chambers. They sought an injunction preventing enforcement of the sections of 1804 requiring employers to confirm the legal status of independent contractors.

This more a CYA victory for business than any benefit to illegal aliens.

Tulsa World (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080604_1__Afede28706)

The plaintiff in this case is the US Chamber of Commerce plus some local chambers. They sought an injunction preventing enforcement of the sections of 1804 requiring employers to confirm the legal status of independent contractors.

This more a CYA victory for business than any benefit to illegal aliens.

Heaven forbid employers be asked to perform due diligence on their workers. It merely shows how desperate the Chamber and its minions are to hang on to their pool of cheap labor.

The Chief Judge of the largest federal court in Oklahoma has stated that Plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to prevail. Even if they don't, the Chief Judge was concerned enough to throw down an injunction. This is not simply about CYA or business. The law is federally preempted. The law is rotten. It has nothing to do with due diligence and everything to do with upholding the Constitution of the United States of America at all costs.

Heaven forbid employers be asked to perform due diligence on their workers. It merely shows how desperate the Chamber and its minions are to hang on to their pool of cheap labor.

Or ... Mr. Terrel could write a piece of legislation that does not conflict with federal law. This is not about good, bad, right or wrong. This is about legality.

Apparently the chamber is saying this scares away people who are here legally as well...what kind of BS is that?

What have I been saying all along?

Lawmakers who write laws that are either so severely flawed they have little chance of ever being enacted or that are so apparently unconstitutional they will never stand the muster of a court challenge do nothing but waste our tax dollars defending their junk laws in court. If Terrell truly believes in these things he supports then he should spend the time and write laws that aren't just feel good but actually have some substance that will not be cast to the wind at the first challenge.

I'll bet if you go back into the legislative history, the Dems who voted to support this did so on condition that the stuff that had a prayer of being constitutional was stripped out.

Wouldn't doubt it. I'm sure they were playing games.

This issue, more than anything, shows the intractable schism that has evolved in the GOP. The business wing of the party has been utilizing this labor for generations. Then, in an effort to deflect from the criminal incompetence of the last eight years, the GOP set out to rile up the base against the illegals. The argument is that our current cultural and economic woes are caused by the illegals. Only morons would buy this argument, but the GOP base provides plenty of morons who, coincidentally, don't like non-white people very much. Much to their horror, their plan worked, and now the base is ready to ship these people back to mexico in cement trucks. Now, the backroom GOP masters, who really serve the corporate class, are scrambling to put the genie back in the bottle and convince their base that the problem isn't as bad as they thought. The US Chamber has been a mouthpiece for corporate Republicanism since day one. They've earned all the misery they're getting for participating in the neo-nazi campaign against illegals. They reap what they sow.

in the neo-nazi campaign against illegals

Let's see - individuals who want our existing laws enforced, which means that people here illegally should be removed (regardless of whether they're from Mexico), now constitutes a "neo-Nazi campaign" against illegals?

That's idiotic.

Last time I checked, Nazi's threw a few million Jews into ovens and/or gas chambers.

Now, if you want enforcement, you're equated with a Nazi. Can you please tell me how you can possibly justify that asinine statement?

People just want our existing immigration laws enforced, such that people are in this country illegally should be removed from this country. To me, that's pretty simple. If that means the Chamber of Commerce has to eat some of its own member businesses, that's their tough luck. They shouldn't be hiring illegal aliens in the first place.

I firmly believe in the enforcement of our immigration laws, and always have, because we are a nation of laws, not men[. So, in this climate of hysterical political correctness that has created an environment that gives illegal aliens the notion that they have some a priori right to be here, that makes me a neo-Nazi? Is an ad-hominem attack the only thing you have to defend your own position? Why don't you smell of what you're shoveling.

-sd

This issue, more than anything, shows the intractable schism that has evolved in the GOP. The business wing of the party has been utilizing this labor for generations. Then, in an effort to deflect from the criminal incompetence of the last eight years, the GOP set out to rile up the base against the illegals. The argument is that our current cultural and economic woes are caused by the illegals. Only morons would buy this argument, but the GOP base provides plenty of morons who, coincidentally, don't like non-white people very much. Much to their horror, their plan worked, and now the base is ready to ship these people back to mexico in cement trucks. Now, the backroom GOP masters, who really serve the corporate class, are scrambling to put the genie back in the bottle and convince their base that the problem isn't as bad as they thought. The US Chamber has been a mouthpiece for corporate Republicanism since day one. They've earned all the misery they're getting for participating in the neo-nazi campaign against illegals. They reap what they sow.

How's that straw man workin' out for ya?

Now there's an undeniable schism in the GOP, no doubt about it

The fiscal conservative wing which is generally opposed to waste [sure, I know that's a loaded word] of government assets on non-citizens, be that through entitlement programs, or the burdens on our penal and educational systems brought by illegals who by and large do not pay or produce enough to repay the government what they cost it.

There's also a feeling with in the GOP and for many Democrats as well that this country is a country of laws. We may need to adjust the laws, however, for right now, the law is what it is. Many feel (GOP and otherwise) that no one should be rewarded for breaking the law.

Many also feel that borders and citizenship are not trivial matters -- that the right to participate in the United States economy, live here, consume our entitlements, etc. is not a human right. That's a right for citizens and that this country has certain requirements to be a citizen. If those requirements are not met, many of us feel that the person who is here and not meeting those requirements ought not be here at all.

There are many legitimate and very valid reasons for supporting the rule of law and the proper enforcement of the laws already on the books.

I will depart from my 1804 brethren here and say that it is not the states' job to do this. That is where 1804 goes wrong. It is a Constitutionally flawed concept. The fact is (this is more my opinion based upon my reading of the Constitution) that the power to regulate immigration is specifically delegated to the federal government. Generally speaking, when that is done (go google up the dormant commerce clause), the states have ZERO power to regulate in that area.

I think that it's unfortunate that the federal government has done a poor job of enforcing our borders but it's not within the power of the state of Oklahoma to do anything about that.

hopefully a bunch of the immigrants come back

Republicans are really hot to enforce the law when it's going to be enforced against certain classes of people. Others, not so much. There are laws that apply to presidents and cabinet members and lobbyists, but no one in the GOP seems too anxious to enforce those.

Republicans are really hot to enforce the law when it's going to be enforced against certain classes of people. Others, not so much. There are laws that apply to presidents and cabinet members and lobbyists, but no one in the GOP seems too anxious to enforce those.

That's why we have elections. I'm sure an Obama administration (if that's the way the country goes) will be delighted to expose all of the wrongdoings of Bush, et al.