How does support for immigration laws that were passed by elected legislators translate into "bigotry and xenophobia"? Do all these marchers actually believe that we should have no immigration laws and that anybody that wanders across the border is entitled to US taxpayer supported education, healthcare, housing subsidy, etc? It makes no sense...

“The Constitution protects each and every one of us.” I don't think the US Constitution "protects" illegal immigrants.

Yes, "Scratching my head," it does. Read your Constitution.

"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

The second clause applies to "any person" and the third applies to "any person within it's jurisdiction."

"Hundreds of people took to the streets of Mountain View on Monday evening to denounce a federal crackdown on undocumented immigrants." Wow! With all the fake news and outraged I would have expected tens of thousands.

"Speaker after speaker at the event pledged that Mountain View would resist federal immigration enforcement." I'll bet. Can we stop paying our taxes and utility bills as well?

"Police Chief Max Bosel gave assurances that local law enforcement would not comply with federal civil immigration policies." Hmmm. Isn't he the one being dragged to court over alleged sexual harassment?

Mountain View Mayor Ken Rosenberg said, "In Mountain View, we recognize and celebrate the benefits of our diversity." Yeah, we see them working in the city's kitchens, gardens, and cleaning houses. We need the steady supply of a working underclass to sustain our lifestyles and standards of living. God forbid we have citizens doing those jobs making a fair wage with benefits.

Oh, here we go again! The weekly working at censoring again. We're not allowed to speak of illegal immigrants in Weeklyville. Don't let those conservative opinions circulate - free speech is NOT allowed (except from the liberals)

@Constitutional Conservative - I don't think by deporting people that have entered the country illegally we're depriving them of life, liberty or property. And the law says that people who have entered the country illegally should be deported - it does not "protect" their habitation here.

Trump is enforcing current law.

The seven nations named in Trump’s executive order are drawn from the Terrorist Prevention Act of 2015. The 2015 “Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015” named Iraq, Iran, Sudan, and Syria, while its 2016 update added Libya, Somalia, and Yemen.

He's using Obama's list. He will create better vetting that will then impact other countries.

Web Link

"Six other times the US has banned immigrants

Donald Trump's 'Muslim ban' is not the first time specific groups or nationalities have been blocked from the US."

An Atlantic Monthly article that shows that most economists' thinking that an increased influx of immigrants provides more jobs for Americans is FALSE and does harm jobs for US workers and the economy:

Web Link

Web Link

Web Link
The Conscience Of A Liberal--Paul Krugman

"First, the benefits of immigration to the population already here are small."
" But as Mr. Hanson explains in his paper, reasonable calculations suggest that we’re talking about very small numbers, perhaps as little as 0.1 percent of GDP.

"My second negative point is that immigration reduces the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants. That’s just supply and demand...

"Finally, the fiscal burden of low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear. "

Also, it is patently untrue that "immigrants" are the solution to low rate of start-ups:

Web Link


Web Link

"The former ambassador stated,” If you were to deport the 30 million undocumented immigrants in the United States that’s going to cost you about 130 billion dollars.”

@Constitutional Conservative. You have cited language that limits what a "state" may do - not what the federal government may do. Have any other language in the Constitution to offer?

Gary, please try to follow the conversation. I was responding to a specific claim by "Scratching my head." They stated, "I don't think the US Constitution "protects" illegal immigrants." I cited the actual Constitution to show protections provided by it, thereby showing the claim to be false. Too many people spout off about what the Constitution says without actually having read the document.

I've discussed this issue many times before and this paper made those comments " go away" without a trace.
Have the rules changed and is the censorship stopped for now, now that the Federal Government is actually enforcing the laws?
BTW, the 14th Amendment applied to the former slaves and was not intended to be applied to ILLEGAL ALIENS! Aiding and abetting ILLEGAL ALIENS is also against Federal law. Expect a complete cut off of Federal funds and both ICE Homeland Security to be present, possibly having Federal Marshal's take over the MVPD and prosecute all who abetted the ILLEGAL ALIENS in MV. You made the choice, now you have to deal with the consequences of making that choice.
Welcome to REALITY. He won, she lost; get over it. If you want the status quo ante, Calexit might be a choice.

Yeah, as a Constitutional Conservative, I don't go by what was "intended," I go by a strict textual interpretation. If they had meant "former slaves" they'd have written "former slaves."

the_punnisher, I think you are quite confused about the Constitution and laws of the United States, please brush up on them.