Monday, July 25, 2011

Mike Lee & Insane Republican/TeaParty Agenda: Out to End "Child Labor Laws"

Back in January, 2011, Teaparty supported Congressman Mike Lee recommended rescinding Child Labor Laws. In February, Missouri State Senator Jane Cunningham (also backed by the Tea-Party) introduced SB 222 that proposed to:
Missouri State Senator Jane Cunningham (also backed by the Tea-Party) introduced SB 222 that proposed to:
•Repeal restrictions for workers under age 14.
•Remove the requirement that workers under age 16 obtain a work permit.
•Loosen industry restrictions on employment of minors [such as allow hotels to employ children under age 16].
•Strip Missouri’s Department of Labor of the authority to inspect workplaces that employ children.
•Eliminate employer record-keeping requirements.
•Abolish the presumption that the presence of a child in the workplace is evidence of her/his employment.
•Fortunately for Missouri’s children, SB 222 died in committee.

In Maine, two Anti Child Labor bills were introducted by Republicans:
LD 1346 proposes to:
•Lower the state’s minimum wage from $7.50 per hour to $5.25 per hour for workers under age 20 for the first 180 days on the job.
•Remove limits on the number of hours workers age 16-17 can work on school days.
•Increase by four hours the amount of time during a school day workers under age 16 can work.
•Repeal the requirement that child-workers obtain a work permit from the school district, substituting parental sign-off on a consent form.
LD 516 proposes to:
•Repeal limits on the number of hours workers age 16 and under can work when school is not in session.
•Remove all limits on the number of hours 17-year-olds can work.

AMERICA, ARE YOU WATCHING? Republicans are looking to end Child Labor Laws enacted by Democrats. REPUBLICANS ARE INSANE!!!!!

The Republicans are OUT OF THEIR MINDS. Their Agenda:
1. END Social Security
2. END Medicare
3. END Child Labor Laws
and many more ANTI Middle Class Bills!


The Republicans and the Teapartiers are Hell-Bent on ENDING America as we know it and FILLING UP THE POCKETS OF THE RICH and BIG BUSINESS! Their Puppeteers, their Masters, including heinous RICH Business People like the Koch Brothers want us to revert to pre-1930s America where the Rich get Richer and the Middle Class and Poor are pushed to Extreme Poverty Levels. This includes: Old People, Children, the Sick, the Helpless -- the Republicans are seeking are Great Country to turn into two separate societies: The Rich, and the Those that SERVE THEM!

1 comment:

Vicente Duque said...

40 pages, Legal Scholars : Immigration State Laws of Arizona, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, etc, are unconstitutional. State enforcement would be unconstitutional even if it were explicitly authorized by Congress. U. S. Congress cannot remove constitutional powers from President and share with non-Executive branch officials

Social Science Research Network
Duke Law Journal, Forthcoming
The Unconstitutionality of State Regulation of Immigration through Criminal Law
Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 10-25

Gabriel J. Chin
University of California, Davis, School of Law

Marc L. Miller
University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law

The “mirror image” theory of cooperative state enforcement of federal immigration law is a phenomenon, one of the most wildly successful legal movements and ideas in decades. The mirror-image theory proposes that states can enact and enforce criminal immigration laws based on federal statutes. The theory that it is unobjectionable for a state to carry out federal policy is the basis of Arizona’s SB1070, similar immigration laws already in force in seven states, and copycat bills pending in dozens more. The mirror-image theory has succeeded not only in legislatures, but also as an idea in the larger political culture: it has been embraced by dozens of U.S. Senators and Representatives, by policy groups, private citizens, and commentators including George Will, Sarah Palin, and the editors of the New York Post and Washington Times.

The mirror image theory is indeed appealing. But it is also fundamentally flawed. This article, the first to subject the mirror image theory to sustained scholarly scrutiny, demonstrates that the mirror image theory fails to identify a legitimate source of state power to legislate on immigration matters.

No one denies that Congress and the Federal executive have exclusive authority over the substance and procedure of admission, exclusion and removal of non-citizens, documented and undocumented. To the extent there has ever been any question, this proposition was firmly established by a pair of Supreme Court decisions from 1876. The mirror image theory does not challenge this deep-rooted idea head-on, but instead proposes that state legislative authority over immigration flows from cases and provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) authorizing states to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law. However, those authorities contemplated state assistance with enforcement only through arrests. Arrest authority does not imply the power to legislate or prosecute. To the contrary, other provisions of the INA make clear that federal agencies have exclusive power to make prosecutorial and administrative decisions after arrest, and to create supplementary regulations.

The mirror image theory rests on the erroneous premise that Congress has implicitly authorized state enforcement of federal immigration law. This article argues that state enforcement would be unconstitutional even if it were explicitly authorized by Congress. First, the federal immigration power is exclusive and non-delegable. Second, criminal prosecution and immigration enforcement is an executive power which Congress cannot remove from the President and share with non-Executive branch officials. Finally, the Supreme Court has held that states cannot prosecute crimes which affect only the sovereign interests of the United States. Accordingly, state immigration prosecutions are irremediably unconstitutional.

Page Hits