Judge Napolitano "Immigration is a right."

[Origanalist]

Dismantling the welfare state isn't going to happen. If we lived in Judge Nap's America I would be fine with it because there would be no welfare to go around, but they are leeches to the system and will keep voting for Democrats to boot. We're on a slippery slope. Let's keep caving into these fools. First, it will be citizenship. Then, when they realize that doesn't work, let's promise to keep Obamacare so they can get cheap health care...All while the state keeps growing and growing.

And there is reality, thank you.

[fr33]

Rights exist regardless if a government recognize them or not.

[KingNothing]

Bull$#@!.

There is no right to become a citizen of our country. There are all kinds of people who have followed our laws who are waiting in line to become citizens and we now are going to grant amnesty to those who broke our laws?

I firmly disagree with the Judge.

There is no right to become a citizen? Says who? Why are we free to move where we want, worship as we want, speak as we want, and defend ourselves.... but not free to live where we want without some arbitrary documentation issued by an arbitrary group of people?

The Judge is exactly right. His stance is the principled and consistent one.

[KingNothing]

[B]Contrary to what most Americans may believe, in fact, the Founding Fathers were by and large skeptical of immigration.

Any many owned slaves. So what? They were just men. Intelligent though they may have been, they were still just men, complete with all the failings of man. And the justification that Jefferson gave was totally utilitarian - and not the least bit principled.

[erowe1]

There are already 12-20 million illegal aliens in this country. How many more do you think we need for prosperity?

If we just legalized immigration, there would be zero illegal immigrants.

I want there to be zero illegal immigrants. Don't you?

Or is it really immigrants in general, and not just illegal ones, that you're concerned about?

[familydog]

How dare the Judge suggest that people outside of our imaginary lines on a map have natural rights? Doesn't he realize that only Amuricans have the right to move?

[KingNothing]

As long as the welfare state exists, this should be a non-issue.

Get rid of the welfare state and birthright citizenship and THEN we will talk. Until then, NO!

How about we get rid of citizenship, in general.

[KingNothing]

How dare the Judge suggest that people outside of our imaginary lines on a map have natural rights? Doesn't he realize that only Amuricans have the right to move?

AMERICA, EFFF YEAH!

[Carehn]

Bull$#@!.

There is no right to become a citizen of our country. There are all kinds of people who have followed our laws who are waiting in line to become citizens and we now are going to grant amnesty to those who broke our laws?

I firmly disagree with the Judge.

It may not be a right to become part of our club, but it is a natural right to move your body without concern for imaginary lines.

[jllundqu]

There is no right to become a citizen? Says who? Why are we free to move where we want, worship as we want, speak as we want, and defend ourselves.... but not free to live where we want without some arbitrary documentation issued by an arbitrary group of people?

The Judge is exactly right. His stance is the principled and consistent one.

Technically he is right, but only in theory... not in reality. Reality is we live in a nation. A nation has borders. The open-borders crowd always buckles when you ask them how to keep criminals out and keep legal immigration in check. In a truly free and sovereign world, yes, I would like to simply walk anywhere and do anything I wanted, regardless of borders and nation states... that ain't never gonna happen y'all!

I wish I lived in The Judge's world, and Ron Paul's world for that matter, but alas... we live in this one. Granting citizenship to 12 million illlegals (whom all data shows would vote overwhelmingly Democrat) would end the two party system forever. We would have a total socialist/communist statist's wet dream.

[sailingaway]

And there is reality, thank you.

The huge problem they won't discuss is the chain family migration from it. That is what 'broke' our system, the 1983 amnesty STILL has family members using preference visas making it almost impossible to enter for those not wealthy from the countries where the majority of people got amnesty. What they should do is totally redo the system and let in those let in with their entire nuclear family (mom, dad, kids) but it is their choice to do it or not, after that, their family members would have to apply separately. What happens is the poorest self select to root themselves up precisely BECAUSE the govt paid education and health care etc makes it worth it, in an unending stream. the incentives are all wrong.

But it is one thing to legalize those here a long time who have been good neighbors and have family here. That is still rewarding bad behavior, but for those here a long time (and I think it should be drafted like that) it is really cruel to send them back. That does not apply to their extended families not here, and it is NOT cruel imho to not reward them with voting. I think a separate, unconvertible, permanent residency for those people should be considered. But no chain migration should stem from it, because that is many times the count of the number of people already here. I don't trust those in congress to actually do it, I expect them to keep the parts of law that says once you are here legally you can change status etc, and to pretend the existing law of change from green cards to citizenship doesn't exist in their discussion. That is what happened last time -- it was downright dishonest with the American people.

[Carehn]

Dismantling the welfare state isn't going to happen. If we lived in Judge Nap's America I would be fine with it because there would be no welfare to go around, but they are leeches to the system and will keep voting for Democrats to boot. We're on a slippery slope. Let's keep caving into these fools. First, it will be citizenship. Then, when they realize that doesn't work, let's promise to keep Obamacare so they can get cheap health care...All while the state keeps growing and growing.

Have you ever had a mosquito bit you? Next time you do and catch it flex your muscles so it cant escape. It will just get bigger and bigger till it POPS. Think of the state like that mosquito. Maybe if it just keeps getting bigger and bigger one day it will pop. It will leave us with a bad case of lyme disease, but at least it got what was coming to it.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

How dare the Judge suggest that people outside of our imaginary lines on a map have natural rights? Doesn't he realize that only Amuricans have the right to move?

Only 'Merkins have God-given natural rights, because God is an American

[KingNothing]

Technically he is right, but only in theory... not in reality.

You do realize that this is basically what everyone outside of Libertarians says about most liberty-oriented ideals, right? "It sounds good, but we NEED government to do such and such."

I don't care much about "keeping criminals out" because I have absolutely no faith that the current system works any better in that regard than a totally borderless system would. As far as "immigrants voting Democrat" I don't particularly care for that line of thinking either. If the Republicans stop being a party built on fear and bigotry and become a party that embraces Liberty on all fronts, they may actually attract new voters.

[LibertyEagle]

lol. Statists in Liberty clothing.

Really? Ok, I'll play. That would make you a globalist in Liberty clothing; as you are doing their bidding, whether you realize it or not.

[Wolfgang Bohringer]

Kudos to the Judge for out-libertarian-ing Ron on this issue--although Ron actually wasn't that bad--always cautioning against walls and the police state which are actually being built to keep us in and oppress us further.

If Judge Nap will challenge Rand for the Republican nomination, I'll have a reason to attend my county central committee meetings and keep my voting status current:

http://revolutionpac.com/articles/draft-judge-napolitano-for-president

[KingNothing]

Really? Ok, I'll play. That would make you a globalist in Liberty clothing; as you are doing their bidding, whether you realize it or not.

LOL!

Right.

[LibertyEagle]

How about we get rid of citizenship, in general.

Because it would be stupid, that's why.

Look, we cannot change how all the people in the world want to live or what kind of government, if any, that they want to have. The best we can do right now is to carve out a piece of the world and live by the rules we want in that small piece. That is what a country should be about and borders separate it from the rest of the world.

It is la la land to believe that there aren't people in this world, and yes, outside our own government, who want the entire damn world under their control and they will stop at nothing to make it so. These people want borders to disappear. That is what all the so-called free trade agreements are about and all the "unions"... African Union, European Union, etc. There are a lot of them and they are just a precursor to the globalists' wet dream of world government.

[LibertyEagle]

LOL!

Right.

Yes. Right! And the sad thing is that you do not even realize it.

[sailingaway]

How dare the Judge suggest that people outside of our imaginary lines on a map have natural rights? Doesn't he realize that only Amuricans have the right to move?

this ignores that people have sums stripped from them without their agreement by govt to pay for things like schools, medical and retirement funds which are over burdened so the quality is terrible. The amounts are too great for the middle class in the areas worst hit by illegal immigration to afford the private schools (about $30,000 per child per year in Los Angeles for a decent one, right now.) So they need the quality of what they are being forced to pay for to stay as good as possible. I DO believe in sovereignty and I do believe a govt has a duty to look out for its citizens above anyone else. How else would you ever have local self determination of government? Note I am speaking of a government, not anarchy, because I do believe in a small government.

Regardless of the philosophical underpinning, I don't think the government of this country can legitimately force its citizens to pay for services and then let unlimited poor people from elsewhere use them. Those who get more in benefits then they pay in do drain what is available, and language is an additional cost. Language is also now cut in most schools until high school, in Los Angeles and then only Spanish is available, typically. It is very difficult to become fluent in ANY language with that, so only kids of those who speak English do NOT come out of the school system bilingual. That is a major market disadvantage, right there.

you can't have open borders and a welfare state, and there is no plan on the table to end the welfare state, to the contrary.

This is one of the topics there has always been a split on here, however, abortion being the other. Some people do believe in sovereignty and the ability of a country to set the rules of entry, some don't. Some believe life begins at conception, some don't. I have never seen anyone convinced of the opposing position.

[LibertyEagle]

It may not be a right to become part of our club, but it is a natural right to move your body without concern for imaginary lines.

You believe national sovereignty is imaginary?

[jllundqu]

You do realize that this is basically what everyone outside of Libertarians says about most liberty-oriented ideals, right? "It sounds good, but we NEED government to do such and such."

I don't care much about "keeping criminals out" because I have absolutely no faith that the current system works any better in that regard than a totally borderless system would. As far as "immigrants voting Democrat" I don't particularly care for that line of thinking either. If the Republicans stop being a party built on fear and bigotry and become a party that embraces Liberty on all fronts, they may actually attract new voters.

So in your world view... we have complete and total open borders, no nation states at all, and all will just be peachy? And you also expect other nations to dissolve their borders as well right? If we don't have a border, we no longer have a country... but I guess from a true Libertarian perspective that is what you would advocate. I am not a libertarian... I am a minarchist... I like having a country with a founding document... and i like defending my country from those would would seek to dissolve it. Globalists around the world are smiling at the fact that Ron Paul supporters like you are playing right into their plans to become borderless and further integrate nations into giant conglomerate corporate states ala the EU and North American Union. No thanks... I like my country with imaginary lines.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]). It would not make sense to allow Congress to pass laws to determine how an immigrant becomes a naturalized resident if the Congress cannot determine how, or even if, that immigrant can come into the country in the first place. Just because the Constitution lacks the word immigration does not mean that it lacks the concept of immigration. -theconstitution.org

[fisharmor]

Controlling immigration is a prerequisite for sovereignty, which in turn is a prerequisite for the protection of rights, which in turn is why we instituted a government in the first place as per the Declaration of Independence. It is not quite so simple in declaring immigration to be a "right", because then you undermine the basis for protection of rights in the first place.

What right is being protected by disallowing immigration?
What right is being destroyed by allowing immigration?
Does the ninth amendment not exist?

[fisharmor]

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind –ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

Page 1 dealt with this. Nobody is advocating that they be able to vote the second their clothes dry out.

[CaptUSA]

you can't have open borders and a welfare state, and there is no plan on the table to end the welfare state, to the contrary.

I agree with this entirely. I think the Judge would agree with you as well. But when you are talking about natural rights, he was right on point. The consistent position here is to dismantle the welfare state to stop luring people in, and then allow anyone who wants to come, to come. If you don't do it in this order, you are asking for destruction. I believe this position is held by both Ron Paul and the Judge.

[familydog]

The resounding lack of empathy for fellow human beings here is quite unnerving.

I feel very sad for those who will use violence and domination to uphold the archaic concept of a "nation."

[LibertyEagle]

The resounding lack of empathy for fellow human beings here is quite unnerving.

I feel very sad for those who will use violence and domination to uphold the archaic concept of a "nation."

Spoken like a true world government aficionado.

Sorry, but none for me.

[jllundqu]

The resounding lack of empathy for fellow human beings here is quite unnerving.

I feel very sad for those who will use violence and domination to uphold the archaic concept of a "nation."

It is not a lack of empathy... it is a matter of property rights. The Judge is spot on in terms of all human beings have natural rights. Put that into the context of a massive welfare state and it gets complicated. If I am forced to pay thru taxation etc for the endless masses that come here illegally, of course I don't want an open border! That would lead to ruin and a complete destruction of my property rights! You can't simultaneously have millions of people flooding the country while an oppressive government says "Oh by the way, we are going to steal from the rest of you to pay for all of them"

If we lived in a world where my property rights were intact and we had a minarchist form of government, you could erase the border, no issues!

[KingNothing]

The resounding lack of empathy for fellow human beings here is quite unnerving.

I feel very sad for those who will use violence and domination to uphold the archaic concept of a "nation."

I totally agree with you. I know that I don't have the heart to actually turn anyone away.

[KingNothing]

Spoken like a true world government aficionado.

Sorry, but none for me.

World Government Aficionado's are concerned with individuals and basic human freedom? News to me.

You do realize that just because one entity that may be "bad" holds a belief, that does not necessarily make the belief "bad," don't you?



"You love your wife? Why, you know that Hitler loved his too, don't you, you Nazi sympathizer!"