Sue the federal government?

Question

I wonder if there would be merit in a lawsuit filed by a citizen, or maybe even as a class action against the federal govt for not enforcing the immigration laws? If there was merit in such a suit, would you be for or against it? I think class action might work.

Answer 1

That is an excellent question. I think that it DOES have merit, either as an individual or as a class action. Our elected officials did take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States, and they are failing miserably!

Answer 2

Nice try but won't work, possible to go after states based upon the eleventh amendment, but Fed Government has a free ride.

The Federal Government can be sued only if they want to be sued.

in England it was impossible to hold the king responsible in tort unless he agreed to be sued. This doctrine, called "sovereign immunity," was adopted by the new American Republic in 1776. As a result of this doctrine, the government can't be sued unless it agrees to be sued.

In 1946, the federal government finally did agree to be sued, but only under certain limited circumstances, when Congress passed the Federal Torts Claim Act (FTCA). Congress stipulated, however, that these suits would not involve juries or punitive damages awards

no matter how negligent or reckless a policy decision might seem in retrospect, the federal government is immune from suit from private citizens, no matter who gets hurt or how much property is lost. Congress has decided, very generally, not to allow policy judgments or their consequences to be litigated -- perhaps to avoid partisan lawsuits that attempt to attack policies that could not be defeated politically.

Answer 3

Colorado voted on and approved a requirement that the Attorney General of Colorado sue the Federal Government for education and incarceration costs etc. incurred due to illegal immigration, as a result of that non-enforcement. As a policy matter, I don't know if they really have a hope of winning, but it should get a lot of attention.

I think it is a hoot.

Answer 4

I believe there are a number of things that show adequate damages to sue for. The problems with such a suit, however, would be monumental. Good thoughts!

Answer 5

Hey! Sounds like a great idea, but I doubt it has a snowball's chance in hell of happening.

For one, I don't think that the federal government can be sued by the people. Although they can sue you whenever they want.

It's common knowlege that money rules the day. So I suggest an "Illegal Immigrant Deportation lottery" Worked similar to the education lotteries. Half goes to prize winners and the other half goes to the round-up, and deportation of illegals and the procecution of those who give them jobs, and rent homes to them and sell to them.

How about that idea?

Answer 6

I personally think Every Victim or family member of a victim (that was murdered) should be able to sue our government.
If every victim sued the gov. I can guarantee you they(our elected *leaders*) might start thinking twice about turning away from the problem. And might actually get their heads out of the sand and start tackling the problem instead of pushing the PROPAGANDA that we Need the illegal aliens here.

Answer 7

Great idea - there has to be a lawyer out there that would want to make a name for him/her self. Got to find a way to at least put this idea in the forefront.
The American citizens suing the government to uphold a law instead of the government writing a "new" law to circumvent the old one.

Just wrote a law firm - they will probably ignore me but it felt good to ask. I am including their link if anyone want to know my source.

Answer 8

I just want to see the border fence built, and the relevant laws enforced to prevent a recurrence of the gross negligence that's seen the revelation of 12-20 million illegal aliens taking up in the United States...stop the human trafficking, stop the drug trafficking, stop it cold. Your idea of filing suit is plausible, but unlikely to do anything but tie up the courts some more. I think a nationwide outpouring of support for the idea of reinforcing immigration law, as well as putting whatever's needed on the borders to effectively prevent illegal crossings, are 2 great ways to approach the problem.

We have a foreign country, Mexico, or more accurately, some of its' citizens and their sympathizers, indirectly trying to make land claims on the territorial United States. Maybe it seems paranoid to be concerned about, but it's just one more page of damning evidence regarding the entire mess concerning our borders.

Mexico in particular FULLY has the potential to go 'over the top' and deal with their problems, but as long as they think they can milk another 20 bucks and public sympathy out of their displays, then they'll continue with it. Slamming the door in their face may seem harsh, but it's also in keeping with how you'd treat unwanted door-to-door salesmen, annoying neighbors that can't seem to keep track of their kids, and so forth. Disabusing ourselves of the constant and chronic whining is appropriate, in this instance, I think. Who needs it, honestly? So, put paid to it, get all 50 states working together to nail together some good solutions to the whole mess, 280 million people reasoning together can and will develop good and workable answers to this problem. There's very little, I think, that cannot be accomplished, under such circumstances...including providing Mexico VERY strong motivation, a la 'or else', to deal with their own civil problems, which we've somehow accidentally managed to inherit.
And, to be fair, it's not just Mexico. I read yesterday how Brazil's talking about 'brain drain' and so forth, and for that matter, it's not just something that is exclusively happening in the United States, either. Take a step back, and look at the Big Map, and you realize there's a host of countries that are plagued by similar issues. Read it, it's in the newspaper. There's now 6 and a half billion, with a 'b', billion people in the world. That's a lot of people. And, every last single one of them wants 'the good life'. Well, don't we all. Ma Baker wanted 'the good life', too, she decided to pursue it at gunpoint. There's a long, long list of people who want that 'good life', and were pretty damn efficient at getting it, Andy FAstow, Ken Lay, numerous dictators, and of course, your friendly neighborhood carjacker.
So, the question comes down to how to try and make it possible for as many people as possible to try and achieve that 'good life'.
I think the best way to do that is to go forth and build schools, because it's proven that the more you study, the better you're likely to live, down the road. People that know how to purify water won't die of thirst or ingesting pollution. People that know how to grow food will rarely if ever go hungry. People that know how to build things won't be stuck outside in the sun, the rain, or freezing cold. That's kind of how it goes, the more you know, the better it gets.

Also, when most people have what they need to get by, there's less people in a situation of desperation where they're tempted to commit a crime to get it. But, teaching people to obtain that for themselves sometimes means providing them the opportunity to prove that they can, in fact, do it BY themselves without either assistance, or monetary support. That's kind of what I think Rush Limbaugh talked about with his 'tough love' rhetoric.
To get all Jesus about it, you give a man a fish, he eats today.
And, he'll be back tomorrow for that next fish. Madison Avenue's 'all over' that action 'cause it's lucrative. Baiting people out of their capacity to support themselves and be functionally and economically independent is the work of many a graduate thesis in marketing, no doubt...BUT: Teach that same man to fish, and he's set for life...or until such time as the oceans run out of fish, which the scientists tell us might be sooner rather than later, but you know how those scientists are, always babbling on about killer asteroids, plagues, the planet falling into the sun, ozone holes, pollution, and so forth...can't trust a word they say...;)

I say 'no lawsuits', but rather, more community involvement, and more being intelligently said on the best way to deal with what is truly a global problem. Ok, well maybe ONE lawsuit, but keep it small. LOLOL Sue em for a dollar.

Answer 9

I think I love you! Great question.

Answer 10

I am for it, but I don't think it would be permitted.