Nebraska Supreme Court to hear city's immigration case

another big waste of taxpayers money. typical though. i will say though that if this ordinance does pass, the wealthy and slum lords in fremont will be really (how shall i put it) upset? another good laugh for me.

There wouldn't be any City money spent thus far if the City would stop acting like an enraged drunk swinging at anything that moves and would let the legal procedure play out before filing lawsuits. I for one would like to see the vote take place so we could see in black and white the percentages of pro vs con but this is what I think the city leaders ultimately fear. Right now they can play it off that the petitioners are a loud minority but what to do and how to explain it if the ordinance gets voted in by a large margine- who are the noise-makers blowing hot air then?

GIVE IT UP ITS NEVER GOING TO PASS!!!!....LOL...OUCH MY STOMACH HURTS!!!!!

In the unlikely event that this silly ordinance is not thrown out by the Court, don’t think for two seconds that all the Hispanic people in Fremont are going to pack their bags and leave. Also, if an illegal immigrant rents in Inglewood and works at Hormel, they still basically live and work in Fremont but the ordinance will not affect them. If the ordinance people are expecting some sort of Hispanic roundup, they will be disappointed.

A complete waste of time and money for everyone, all because some people in Fremont can not see their immigrant ancestors in today's immigrants. Rewind 100 years, and unfortunately you would find the same irrational fear that is driving this illegal action by the leaders of this ballot initiative.

Sean,

The city should "let the legal procedure play out before filing lawsuits?" Isn't that exactly what they are doing? Look up Nebraska Revised Statute 18-2538, which says, "If the municipality does file such an action prior to receiving notification pursuant to section 18-2518, it shall not be required to proceed to hold such election until a final decision has been rendered in the action." This is exactly what the city is doing. So far the city has filed an action for declaratory judgment, a trial court has dismissed this action, and the city has appealed that decision to the Nebraska Supreme Court. Oh my god! The city is completely out of the control! Hide the women and children!

These rules are just one of the things the US govt should have implemented on a national basis long ago with severe penalties for non-compliance.

Mary

I never said the city wasn't legally entitled to fritter away money filing lawsuits, I said it was a waste to do so prematurly. You better hope the City makes a better case than they did when they fumbled through their talking points in front of Samson or the money's been blown for nothing. If the City had bided its time the ACLU and LaRaza would have provided ample talented legal shysters free of charge along with plenty of bussed in 'oppostion' for the 5 o'clock news. The City isn't playing it smart from a tactical point of view but the pretense of saving money has been condescending anyway. Thanks for straightening me out though.

Mary said:
"A complete waste of time and money for everyone, all because some people in Fremont can not see their immigrant ancestors in today's immigrants. Rewind 100 years, and unfortunately you would find the same irrational fear that is driving this illegal action by the leaders of this ballot initiative." -------------------------------------------
The huge hole in your argument is that our ancestors who came here 100 years ago weren't illegal alien lawbreakers. So, do you support illegal alien lawbreakers?

Sophia

Mary doesn't mind the presence of millions of illegal squatters because she views them as the underdog as the media has portrayed them. National media is all over it when there is an ICE raid and the majority of the coverage is designed to tug the heart strings by focusing on the children of illegals as if we bear sole responsibility for their plight and are somehow in the wrong for wanting illegals accounted for and deported. She's also apparently under the illusion that there is a vast expanse of the continent offering limitless opportunities just waiting to be tamed as per her reference to 100 years ago. Obviously it's slipped in under her radar that now even more than last year with the continued deterioration of the economy and reports like the one claiming 10,000 applications were turned in for 90 openings that actual citizens should be first in line for dwindling resources and employment opportunities. She's also apparently quite comfortable blurring the line between wanting something done with illegals and wanting to round up all Hispanics in the middle of the night with pitchforks and torches. This last one is the one I find more than slightly irritating as it's nothing but a smear approach to debating an issue- put another way, she and a few others on her side of the aisle are deliberately deceitful in my opinion making prolonged one on one debate with them a waste of keystrokes.

The City of Fremont lost in Judge Samson’s court precisely because they chose to only defend the parts of Nebraska State Statues they liked best. Laws are written to be read in their entirety, not nitpicked. 18-2538, as well as other Nebraska State Law, is immensely clear that a City (In this Case) can’t bully the populace with lawsuits paid for by that same population. 18-2538 also clearly states, “Any action brought for declaratory judgment pursuant to this section shall be given priority in scheduling hearings and in disposition as determined by the court. ……….a decision shall be rendered by the court no later than five days prior to the election.” That Election Day came and went many months ago. In 18-2538’s Annotations it clearly states that once the Petition process is set in motion as per Nebraska Law, “it shall be required to proceed with the initiative or referendum election”. “Shall” and “required to proceed” aren’t “Gray Area” terms folks. Fremont is currently in violation of Nebraska State Statue.

The common counter argument used by the “Enablers” that people who chose to petition their elected officials are “crazies or hate mongers” are themselves showing a massive amount of intolerance. The First Amendment to the US Constitution grants 5 Basic Freedoms. Most can recite from memory the freedoms to assemble, press, religion & speech but forget the most important of those 5 Basic Freedoms. I quote far better minds than mine, “to petition the Government for redress of grievances”. That doesn’t sound hateful to me.

The good people of Fremont have a very big concern, right or wrong. A handful of people that have much to gain by reestablishing slavery in our City don’t approve. In our form of Government such matters are put to a vote. The Petitioners have done everything asked of them following the letter of the law. The City of Fremont, for some odd reason, is fighting itself to prevent the most basic of our Civil Liberties. I ask; who is fighting the good fight?

Mary don't you understand, Yes we are from immagrants, BUT they came here legally. I guess the city council wants a santurary city. If that happens who will pay for it. We the citizens of fremont. If thery want to honor illegals and give them jobs and houseing what about the other law brakers??
They cry about the budget. where are they getting all the money for the appeals they are filling. It is not done for FREE or is there someone with money behind all this.

Sean,

You don't like people engaging in "nothing but a smear approach to debating an issue," and yet you use your entire message putting words in my mouth. Nice. Nothing beats hypocrisy. The land needed to be "tamed?" Really? What exactly does that mean and I wonder if the Native Americans would agree with you on that. The continent was not empty. Read a little history on how the first European settlers stole the land from the Pawnees and placed them on a reservation.

Sophia,

You are correct: your ancestors who came 100 years were not illegal aliens (again, I wonder how the Native American would see that) in the eyes of the US government because there were no immigration laws back then, except for the Chinese who were excluded from 1886 to 1943. You ask, "So, do you support illegal alien lawbreakers?" What a silly question. I support creating a federal immigration system that is fair and provides the necessary workers for our country. I do not support unconstitutional local ordinances like this. We all know the true intentions of the folks behind this. Well, demographic shifts are a _____, so get used to it.

For your in fomation
The Mongols and Chinese crossed the Bering Strat in to what is Alaska today. They migrated south to what is the US and across the country to the east. Hence the American Indian. So you see they were the first immagrants here.
So when the Mexicans say it is their country they are wrong

Mary

That's rich, someone who offers little in the way of facts telling me to read some history. You want to talk about injustices to the Native Americans I can do that and even agree with much of it but it has nothing to do with the current issue on illegals. Europeans were guilty of massacres among many other injustices but what about the native cultures that were already here? Aztecs were engaged in ritual human sacrifice to the tune of tens if not hundreds of thousands a year treating more primitive tribes as if they were livestock. The Sioux, Apache, Commanche and Iroquois to name a few engaged in behavior every bit as savage if not more so as any the Europeans committed and they were doing it long before Europeans arrived- covering victims with honey and tying them over an ant hill, suspending them alive over a slow burning fire, etc. The fact that they are today stuck on reservations mired down in addiction to alcohol is wrong and I would like to see this issue addressed but it is another issue entirely. How does an influx of tens of millions of illegal Central American Indians compensate for the plight if North American Indian tribes, you fail to tie it all in. It doesn't compensate, it exacerbates as it is a huge drain on already dwindling resources. Illegals aren't coming here to make a better life, they are coming here where a better life has been made and shipping it back to Central America. Ever notice the high demand for phone cards for Mexico and services to wire money out of the country? They don't come here out of a sense of wanting to contribute and assimilate but rather to make money and send it back 'home'. Radical groups like LaRaza and Aztlán openly work towards breaking off the Southwestern US and returning it to "Greater Mexico". Nobody I've read on these boards has a problem with legal immigrants who have made a commitment to the country and show a willingness to assimilate themselves to the country rather than 'repatriating' large sections back to Mexico. I didn't put words into your mouth so much as sum up your positions.

"I do not support unconstitutional local ordinances like this. We all know the true intentions of the folks behind this."

There ya go again, no need to put words in your mouth. cuz there's no room to get them past your foot. Ah, hypocrisy indeed. I called it like I see it, nothing more.

Reply to fremonter:

You say this is all a waste of money? How about all the Taxpayers money that goes to FREE medical care for the illegal aliens? How about all the money the taxpayers pay for the schooling of the illegal aliens children? How about all the money that is sent out of this Country by the illegal aliens? How about all the crime? Should I go on? The illegal aliens, ALL OF THEM are a waste of money!

to Delaware Bob:
i say its a waste of money because if it passes it will be more expensive for the city. what i mean is:
1. this is a FEDERAL matter not local.
2. the first time any illegal or otherwise challenges the law, it will cost the city a fortune in court.
3. it wont pass, as i said before, due to the blue hairs and the wealthy who dont want it to pass because if it did these "chosen few" will lose a fortune by not being able to rent to "anyone", or hire them at a low wage.

Mary,
with regards to the native Americans that you state in your posts I will add to other posts that regardless of what happened to them hundreds of years ago is meaningless in today's world.
The "native Americans" are NOT locked up on reservations. Legally they are American citizens like any other legal citizen. Yes they were forced there in the the 1800s or before, but there are no barbed wire fences, no armed guards, no checkpoints. Any minute a native american can pack up their bags and move to anywhere else in the nation just like anyone else. They choose to stay on their own free will. They would rather get the gov wealfare checks and play the liberal democrat political correctness VICTIM mentality.
YES their ancestors may have been victims, but those alive are not now.
This nation was built on the rule of law and current immigrants from other nations should enter here legally with proper background and medical checks.

Fremonter

So what's your answer, step back and let the Federal Government do their job? I think we all know after the last 30 years that that's a joke. The way I see it is at least people are willing to do SOMETHING- to draw a line and make themselves heard. You think most of us don't realize we're beating our heads against a wall? An overwhelming majority of the citizens in this country have expressed their thoughts on the issue to the Federal Government only to be ignored completely. Do you not find anything disturbing about this? Are there no red flags when our supposed 'representative' form of government puts the people on iggy? The mess you have today is precisely because the Federal Government has usurped powers from the states that the founding fathers deliberately reserved for the states. Jefferson and Madison made it clear that immigration was an issue that the states had the final say on. In fact the Federal Government was originally not allowed to compel any state to accept immigrants. The Vermont Constitution of 1793 recognized citizens rights to emigrate from state to state, provided the laws of the state accepted them. That's right, states could elect whether or not to accept immigrants from other states in the Union let alone immigrants from foreign countries. The constitution was set up to keep the Federal Government subservient to the states and not visa versa as we have today. Centralization of power is what leads to tyranny and the states today are shackled to a faceless centralized Federal apparatus that more often than not acts contrarily and contemptuously towards the wishes of the people. We're already being taxed to death to pay for things that most of us don't even support which is another example of what I am saying so what's the difference if I pay more taxes to pay for something I DO support. I'm paying big bucks weekly for Social Security which will be bankrupt before it's my turn at the trough, a war in Iraq which we were lied into, countless billions a year for foreign aid and globalist financial interests like the IMF and World Bank, nearly two trillion for bailouts of corrupt domestic financial interests...need I go on? Yes, take a few more bucks out of my pocket and DO SOMETHING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DONE WITH IT!!!