I WAS GIVEN THIS QUESTION IN CLASS TODAY
Because of the overlapping nature of the powers in a federal system, there are often conflicts between the various levels of government. What is another example of an issue that has become a problem because of differing ideas/laws from the state to the federal level? What is the current status of this issue today? Is it still a problem?
NOW PLEASE READ ON:
The first thing that comes to mind on conficting ideas/laws is the issue of providing illegal aliens with driver's licenses and in-state tuition.
That's what I thought of so far, but what can I say about the differing ideas. Does the federal government and the state governments have hold different opinions?
I have a lot of ideas running through my head, but I need help sorting it out... Is there anyone out there who has a clue about what I'm trying to say? Could you help?
THANK YOU!
2007-11-06 07:48:26 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
Your argument should be federal law vs state law when it comes to the rights and benefits bestowed upon immigrants with the status of being legal. You're trying to cover too much here...stick to the focus on legal immigrants then pick apart state vs federal law(s) when it comes to benefits.
Do you endorse rights for illegal immigrants? If not, why? Do you see the problem legal immigrants have with illegals? That in itself is a real concern...People who have strived to become legal over the years and finally granted rights - and now having to fend off the illegals wanting the SAME rights! Hardly fair...
Geez, this is a hot and timely topic - good one too! Make it work!
Grace
2007-11-06 07:55:12 · answer #1 · answered by bunnyONE 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
A big problem with the illegal alien issue is that it is not the job of the DMV to check the immigration status of applicants. In-state tuition is not given to foreigners that do not have valid student visas and even then it is not automatic. Here, again you have a grey area. In California the use of medical marijauna is legal but this law conflicts with federal drug laws. Several federal mandates have been enacted in the last few decades that often cause conflict between states and the fed. The No Child Left Behind Act is one. It is only enforceable by witholding federal education funding. There is a federal mandate on wearing seatbelts currently in effect, but all states do not agree with such a mandate. At least two states do not change clocks for daylight savings time. A fifty-five mile per hour speed limit was enacted on all national highways, but has since been dropped, as has a federal motorcycle helmet law. The U.S. Civil War was the result of states not wanting interference from the federal government.
2007-11-06 07:59:54 · answer #2 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some states are like the feds and are giving illegals all kinds of benefits. Others are for enforcing the rule of law - as are some congressmen. This seems to be more of an individual difference than a difference between state and feds. The federal government is not enforcing existing immigration laws which is causing some states to enact their own. I don't know if this helped much. The best example is going to be the Civil War.
2007-11-06 08:01:43 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure what your question is.
Both drivers licenses and university tuition at state schools are the business only of the states. The fed has no control of these but can force it's input by withholding federal money if the state doesn't do as it is told.
Another issue that the fed would like to control but is reserved for the states is gay marriage.
There are no federal traffic laws but one time they did impose a national speed limit. The did it by threatening to withhold federal tax money from states that did not comply with 55. (I can't drive 55!)
2007-11-06 07:53:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
gay marriage is another issue. It's legal in MA. Of course the federal government hasn't ruled on it. But it's not legal in every state. I know one issue that I've read about is that a couple that got married in MA wants to get divorced in another state that does not currently allow gay marriage.
Federal law trumps state law in all cases.
NH is violating federal law when it comes to speeding because they do not follow the federal laws.
2007-11-06 08:02:09 · answer #5 · answered by Unsub29 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that you have a good example. I am not sure what your teacher will think. Teachers frequently have a hard time keeping their leftist views out of their classrooms.
Some states are thumbing their noses at the federal laws. It also seems that the people in charge of our federal government are not for the federal laws either. They just do not have the voter support to change them.
2007-11-06 07:55:46 · answer #6 · answered by Bob J 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
California voted in a proposition that made the dispensing of marijuana legal for medical purposes.
Several state 'licensed' dispensaries have been target in federal DEA raids and shut down due to federal law enforcement. Even though the state has declared them legal and licensed them to dispense marijuana.
2007-11-06 07:57:00 · answer #7 · answered by QBeing 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
...read about "socialism" and Communism... that's what the "Dummycrats" are advocating... Comrade Clinton will indoctrinate you...
2007-11-06 07:54:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
screw the illegals!!!!!!!
2007-11-06 07:54:23 · answer #9 · answered by cykomiko 2 · 7⤊ 0⤋