Analysis: What’s the Real Reason Behind Central American Immigrant Wave? U.S. Law

  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Jul 30, 2014 11:10 PM GMT
    Analysis: What’s the Real Reason Behind Central American Immigrant Wave? U.S. Law


    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/06/analysis-whats-the-real-reason-behind-central-american-immigrant-wave-u-s-law/
  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Jul 30, 2014 11:11 PM GMT
    The KKK Wants a ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy to Include Migrant Children

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180840/kkk-wants-shoot-kill-policy-aimed-immigrant-children
  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Jul 30, 2014 11:12 PM GMT
    10389022_869511049729127_866940016757558
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Jul 30, 2014 11:16 PM GMT
    metta8 saidThe KKK Wants a ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy to Include Migrant Children

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180840/kkk-wants-shoot-kill-policy-aimed-immigrant-children


    This is "all" moot under international law. The United States is signatory to multiple UN Declarations on, for example, the Rights of the Child. Those signatory declarations have the force of "Treaty" law, and international treaties form the "supreme law of the land" in this country, under Article VI of the Constitution; not what Rick Perry "thinks."

  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jul 31, 2014 2:37 AM GMT
    the real reason is a little bump in population to appease WalMart, McDonald's, et al, and a bunch of slum lords where 90% of them will ultimately be living, eating and shopping
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 09, 2014 8:50 AM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    metta8 saidThe KKK Wants a ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy to Include Migrant Children

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180840/kkk-wants-shoot-kill-policy-aimed-immigrant-children


    This is "all" moot under international law. The United States is signatory to multiple UN Declarations on, for example, the Rights of the Child. Those signatory declarations have the force of "Treaty" law, and international treaties form the "supreme law of the land" in this country, under Article VI of the Constitution; not what Rick Perry "thinks."



    Question for you, the UNCRC isn't ratified by the US. It was signed but never ratified, doesn't that mean it doesn't have the force law in the usa?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 09, 2014 11:15 AM GMT
    WrestlerBoy said
    metta8 saidThe KKK Wants a ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy to Include Migrant Children

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180840/kkk-wants-shoot-kill-policy-aimed-immigrant-children


    This is "all" moot under international law. The United States is signatory to multiple UN Declarations on, for example, the Rights of the Child. Those signatory declarations have the force of "Treaty" law, and international treaties form the "supreme law of the land" in this country, under Article VI of the Constitution; not what Rick Perry "thinks."




    You seriously practice International Law? I would expect someone who is practicing International Law to understand the ratification process better.

    No "declarations" from the UN or any other organization or body carries the "force of 'treaty' law" or "forms the supreme law of the land" in this country'" under any article of the Constitution, until it has two thirds of the vote of the United States Senate.

    Article II, section II of the Constitution:

    "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators Present concur". Any President of the U.S. can be a signatory to anything he likes, but until he has a two thirds majority of the Senate it has no more "Force of "'treaty' law" or "forms the supreme law of the land" than your grocery list!

    That's something you learn in a ninth grade civics class, and something someone practicing International Law should certainly be well aware of.

    FYI, "the Rights of the Child", lacking a vote of two thirds of the Senate, as yet has not been ratified by the United States and, therefor, does not form "the supreme law of the land", therefor, it has no more legal force in the United States than your grocery list does.
  • WrestlerBoy

    Posts: 1903

    Aug 11, 2014 9:16 PM GMT
    shybuffguy said
    WrestlerBoy said
    metta8 saidThe KKK Wants a ‘Shoot to Kill’ Policy to Include Migrant Children

    http://www.thenation.com/blog/180840/kkk-wants-shoot-kill-policy-aimed-immigrant-children


    This is "all" moot under international law. The United States is signatory to multiple UN Declarations on, for example, the Rights of the Child. Those signatory declarations have the force of "Treaty" law, and international treaties form the "supreme law of the land" in this country, under Article VI of the Constitution; not what Rick Perry "thinks."




    You seriously practice International Law? I would expect someone who is practicing International Law to understand the ratification process better.

    No "declarations" from the UN or any other organization or body carries the "force of 'treaty' law" or "forms the supreme law of the land" in this country'" under any article of the Constitution, until it has two thirds of the vote of the United States Senate.

    Article II, section II of the Constitution:

    "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators Present concur". Any President of the U.S. can be a signatory to anything he likes, but until he has a two thirds majority of the Senate it has no more "Force of "'treaty' law" or "forms the supreme law of the land" than your grocery list!

    That's something you learn in a ninth grade civics class, and something someone practicing International Law should certainly be well aware of.

    FYI, "the Rights of the Child", lacking a vote of two thirds of the Senate, as yet has not been ratified by the United States and, therefor, does not form "the supreme law of the land", therefor, it has no more legal force in the United States than your grocery list does.


    More law, less googling wall posting. You're clueless...as usual. Resolutions of the SECURITY COUNCIL ARE "international law." But this would take too long to school you, again, as usual.