Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KingofBrown" data-source="post: 751888" data-attributes="member: 28771">I don't know if you are trying to kind everyone else or just kidding yourself. The feds aren't suing over your recent favorite flavor of "reasonable suspension" or "bigotry" or profiling, because they know that is a very weak argument. Trust me, the talking heads have already stated profiling as on of their fears several times. They would not hesitate to use it again either, if they can demonize the proponents of SB1070.No, Cowboy, that’s not my favorite. I’ve already said that the most interesting is section is 13-3883. But it seems that your favorite is the “Reasonable Suspicion” one. As I’ve said before, the Fed is going to use the Supremacy Clause, because illegal immigration has something to do with international issues and No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. And if you want to read further about my opinion of why I think they’re using this argument, read post #1450. But, of course it’s just my opinion.  Oh please, don't try to take credit for educating me on the constitutionality of SB1070. I stated on page 29, post 426 "I understand that the Constitution gives the responsibility of protecting the US to the federal government, and this may be what is used to try and declare the law unconstitutional." your first post on this thread wasn't until page 30, post #441. So your claim of, "And I mentioned it earlier than the Cowboy, with an already anwered question I asked to him.", is proven to be untrue.Oops, so I guess I was not here when you mentioned that. But, OK, you were the first one that came up with that, then me, and then av8tornt. So, that doesn’t change much on the whole point I was making to av8tornt. You got that first than av8tornt, too, cool.</blockquote>

Verification