Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...
video production in Manassas and Prince William County

The Rule Of Law Act Unveiled

By Greg L | 29 July 2010 | 31st HOD District, Virginia Politics, Prince William County | 19 Comments

Prince William County Chairman Corey Stewart released his draft of the Rule of Law Act today, and immediately members of the House of Delegates pledged to introduce it during next year’s session of the General Assembly.  Despite the ongoing and inevitable (given the current Administration in Washington) legal wranglings that are tying up SB 1070 in Arizona, there’s hope that Virginia will move ahead to protect taxpayers, legal workers, honest businesses and our community, all of which suffer from the impacts of illegal immigration and those who profit by perpetuating the state of rampant lawlessness it creates.

The resulting desperation of the left was palpable and in predictable high dudgeon.  The Washington Post returned to the “you’re a xenophobic bigot” hogwash that seems to be the typical argument they can bring to bear in any debate when they know they’ve lost.  How those who supposedly commit “journalism” can bandy about thoroughly unsupported character assassinations and still remain relevant in the debate is yet to be seen, but the left largely abandoning the thin supremacy clause arguments they previously thought were so utterly compelling so quickly is probably a minor cause for celebration.  When intellectual bankruptcy gives way to blind hyperbole, the collapse of their entire agenda can’t be that far away.

Here’s the legislative summary of the proposed law, and it looks like a tremendously comprehensive approach to the problem entirely within the limits of federal authority:

Objectives Achieved in this Draft

  • Preserves and legally strengthens vital Arizona enforcement provisions
  • Anticipates and avoids legal pitfalls in Arizona law by placing key provisions in sections upheld by 2010-7-28 federal district court ruling (Section 3B)
  • Incorporates other best practices, specifically from Oklahoma and Georgia statutes, not present in Arizona law (Section 7, Section 8 )
  • Advances new real estate property ownership provision (Section 9)

Section by Section Breakdown

Sections 1, 2, and 10: Intent, Title, and Severability

  • Sections 1 and 2 identify the Title and Intent of the Virginia Rule of Law Act
  • Section 10 establishes that if any one provision of the law were enjoined or struck down, the rest of the law would go forward

Section 3: Cooperation and assistance in enforcement of immigration laws

  • Completely invalidates any and all sanctuary policies and ordinances in Virginia (Section 3A)
  • Directs law enforcement to determine legal residency status during any lawful stop, detention, or arrest where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an unlawfully present alien, unless such determination will hinder or obstruct a criminal investigation (Section 3B.2)
  • Completely forbids racial profiling (Section 3B.3)
  • Instructs local and state detention facilities to turn criminal illegal aliens over to ICE after their sentence is served (Section 3C)

Sections 4 and 6: Human smuggling and conspiracy to smuggle

  • Allows Commonwealth Attorneys to prosecute human smuggling and conspiracy to smuggle
  • Targets criminals who use drop houses or vehicles to knowingly transport illegal aliens

Section 5: Unlawful stopping to hire and pick up passengers for work – unlawful application or solicitation or employment

  • Prohibits roadside solicitation on public roads, right-of-ways, and sidewalks; similar to Virginia ordinance adopted by Prince William County July 27, 2010. Prince William County is the first and only locality to do this since July 1 when the Virginia statute became active. This provision would mandate it for the entire Commonwealth. (Sec. 5A)
  • Adds private property to the solicitation ban at property owners’ request (Sec. 5B)
  • Prohibits illegal aliens from seeking work at day labor sites (Sec. 5C)

Section 7: Money and wire transmission fee – income tax credit enforcement

  • Modeled after successful Oklahoma law
  • Collects $5 fee for wire transmissions up to $500 and 1% thereafter
  • Remits that fee as a state income tax credit
  • This discourages international remittances, allows the Commonwealth to collect otherwise unpaid taxes, and places no fiscal burden on any law abiding legally present person.

Section 8: Unlawful registration of a motor vehicle

  • Modeled after Georgia statute
  • Prohibits registration of an automobile in the name of an illegal alien

Section 9: Unlawful acquisition or use of real estate by illegal alien

  • Makes it illegal for an illegal alien to rent or own real estate
  • Does not place a burden on real estate agents

Delegate Scott Lingamfelter immediately issued a press release to support this effort and reassure constituents that the General Assembly would be taking this issue up in January.

WOODBRIDGE, VA - Delegate L. Scott Lingamfelter (R-31, Prince William and Fauquier), reacted today to calls from the Chairman of the Prince William County Board of Supervisors, Corey Stewart, for legislation to address immigration issues in the upcoming January 2011 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. Lingamfelter issued this statement to the press:

“I have taken Mr. Stewart’s recommendations under advisement and sent them to Richmond today for a legislative services review. When that assessment is complete, we will determine the best course of action to address these ideas, some of which have been attempted in past years. Additionally, I intend to request that the Governor’s Office review
these ideas as some of them are already under consideration or have already been requested many weeks ago.

“The public, particularly those who agree with me that illegal immigration must be addressed, can rest assured that many of my colleagues in the General Assembly are already hard at work to achieve the best possible results when it comes to the rule of law.

“I appreciate Mr. Stewart’s enthusiasm and support for our efforts. It is my hope that the County Board of Supervisors under his leadership will address his immigration ideas in their legislative package they will present to us for consideration later this year.

“In the meantime, I think it is important to stress that public advocacy alone is not how we will get the job done. We need help in the State Senate where the Democratic majority has not been supportive of efforts to deal with the impact of illegal immigration in Virginia. I look forward to Corey’s support in getting more Republicans elected to that body. Moreover, I think it is critical that all of us—local, state, and federal elected leaders and candidates and all citizens—demand that the Obama Administration take immediate steps to secure our border with Mexico.

“When a boat springs a leak, you plug the hole. Bailing endlessly – as states must do now absent Federal action – is not helpful. This November we must take action and defeat all federal elected officials who are not supportive of a no-nonsense effort to secure the borders of this nation.”

Lingamfelter, a retired Colonel and combat veteran who served 28 years in the U.S. Army, was elected to the House of Delegates in 2001 and has been a longtime proponent of controlling illegal immigration.

Although Delegate Lingamfelter doesn’t come out and explicitly endorse this specific draft, it’s pretty clear to me he’s going to take the best proposals and move them forward, and the Rule of Law Act is one of the best proposals I’ve ever seen at the state level. With the momentum growing for taking action and some strong and very carefully constructed initiatives being crafted, it’s going to be very difficult for the Senate of Virginia to do their usual dirty work and summarily shoot down any proposals that will help protect Virginians from the impacts of illegal immigration.

It’s still going to be up to us — every one of us — to make this happen, though. This is the year for enacting some strong solutions at the state level to address illegal immigration, and the difference between victory and defeat will be how much pressure constituents can bring to bear upon their elected officials.

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.


  1. The Patriot (Got E-Verify???) said on 29 Jul 2010 at 7:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    “A newly revealed memo, obtained by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) who is leading the fight against amnesty, shows Obama Administration officials offering a detailed plan that would offer actual or de facto amnesty to millions of illegal aliens without Congress ever taking a vote.”

  2. Disgusted said on 29 Jul 2010 at 9:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Stewart has drafted a nice piece of legislation. I hope it survives intact next session of the GA.

  3. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2010 at 1:04 am:
    Flag comment

    Apparently, he doesn’t read the papers.

  4. Anonymous said on 30 Jul 2010 at 8:33 am:
    Flag comment

    Stewart has drafted nothing. IRLI did it. And it absolutely cannot survive intact due to the ‘one object rule’ on legislation in the General Assembly. Bob Marshall regulary goes on the warpath (and usually succeeds) when someone tries to violate the one object rule.

  5. Walter E. Kurtz said on 30 Jul 2010 at 9:45 am:
    Flag comment

    Just before I turned 10 years old, I made up a list of possible birthday gifts. Topping the list was a horse. I showed my parents the list. For various reasons, they could not get me a horse.

    Over 40 years later, I’ve got my horse(s). But it took a lot of hard work. No one ever gave one to me.

    Corey has shown us his wish list. Maybe with a lot of hard work, he can get some of it. But I doubt anyone is going to give it to him just for writing it down and showing it to us.

  6. june bug said on 30 Jul 2010 at 2:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    This is one of the greatest undertakings that an Elected Official has put himself forward to do for we the citizens. I applaud Corey Stewart for stepping up and being the kind of Leader we have needed in this County,Country and the United States. Every rule,proposal and Law is and should be for the protection of all of us. It doesn’t matter if it’s Local, State or Federal one is elected to represent the people and put forth the effort to protect us.
    I for one hope that all the General Assembly will study hard what Corey and others have suggested and finally put Laws into place that will protect our Country. We are losing our Identity and we need to get back on track.

    I was again very disappointed in our Chief of Police remarking in the News that he would not enforce or back racism.I can not believe that he feels the people want our Country protected and there are Laws on the Books,that says the illegals do not have the right to sneak across the border.And the Chief refers to it as racism!
    This is not the Chief I have know all these years and had alot of respect for him a very long time. This is so sad, and I feel he has forgotten his Oath of Office in serving the citizens of our County and State. Yes Chief the citizens who are here legally and applied and waited their turn to become a citizen.

    So as this elderly lady is seeing some hope for America to get back to protecting our Country and Our Citizens. I have the Greatest Hopes for Corey, the Board of Supervisors and our General Assembly to honor America and stand united in getting Laws that will enable us to send the Illegals back to where they came from and start over there to improve their Country.

    If we don’t there will not be a Country left for our Grandchildren and all future generations.

  7. Lovettsville Lady said on 30 Jul 2010 at 2:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Articles like his one should help bolster Corey Stewart’s proposal for law:


  8. Cynic said on 30 Jul 2010 at 3:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    june bug and Lovettsville Lady,

    “If we don’t there will not be a Country left for our Grandchildren and all future generations.”

    That is the objective of liberals - destroy the country.

    The 4 time DWI illegal will not be deported. The Open Border crowd will get his deportation order canceled one way or another and then when he is released from prison they will throw a party for him. It’s a good bet that the Chief will be hosting the party. Compassion, you know! Besides, it is our racist society that drove that poor illegal to drink.

  9. Whatever said on 30 Jul 2010 at 5:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    I have to admit, this is absolutely fascinating to watch. Particularly for those of us who are a little less lemming-like and willing to both pay close attention and read a bit between the lines.

    First, it’s blantantly obvious from the article that both Scott and Jackson are royally pissed off. Why? Because they’re our representatives in the HOD, and Corey bypassed them in yet another feeble attempt to bring attention to himself. And make no mistake, this isn’t going to go anywhere at the state level. Both Delegates practically said as much. Scott is already poking holes in it, and Jackson shares the fact that he’s been working on this in Richmond for several years. Corey’s going to make it happen? Please.

    Speaking of upset politicians, I have to wonder how John Stirrup’s taking all of this. I mean, this was his baby. He did all of the leg work and heavy lifting on the resolution in PWC. Corey simply saw which way the wind was blowing, hitched his wagon to a new issue and then made it his own right out from under John’s nose. Ouch.

  10. Greg L said on 30 Jul 2010 at 5:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’ve spoken to both Delegates Lingamfelter and Miller, and no, they’re not pissed off. They’re pleased that perhaps finally there’s some momentum to finally dealing with this issue that the stonewalling Senate might not find so easy to destroy, once again. They’re both adamant that if this issue is to be dealt with at the state level, either the Senate needs to really hear from constituents beyond what they’ve ever seen before, or the senate has to be replaced.

    As for Supervisor Stirrup, he’s just happy we made some progress. Some politicians are all about taking credit, then there are those who just want to get things done. Stirrup is definitely in the latter group.

    So for you Whatever (aka ElephantKiller - now there’s a moniker that denotes reasoning and fairness), how about you enjoy watching your Democrat colleagues try to define publicly defensible stands on the issue. I’d really like to see Dick Saslaw stand up and clearly explain his take on this.

  11. Whatever said on 30 Jul 2010 at 6:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    Interestingly, Greg, while I do consider myself to be a moderate Democrat, the name for that email address has absolutely nothing to do with politics whatsoever and was actually inspired by a practical joke at the office some years back.
    And while I certainly don’t agree with many of John’s policy decisions, I do applaus his sincerity and willingness to let Corey steal the limelight on this. My objections to Corey have little to do with policy because, quite frankly, I have no idea what he stands for other than, well, Corey. It’s unfortunate that most folks pay less attention to local politics than, say, American Idol. If that weren’t the case, Corey’s antics would have already been his downfall.

  12. june bug said on 30 Jul 2010 at 10:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    What ever made you think citizens don’t pay attention to our local politics?
    This is why there are so many people agree with Corey and he will proceed.This is what we needed,to stand up and be counted. The Supervisors did that when voting for the Resolution a few years ago!

    I would have hoped that Lingamfelter would have come across more positive in the news article, but I know Corey and our Supervisors are wanting all of the Delgates help in getting some strong Laws on the Books in Virginia. After all we have Laws on the Federal Level and for over 20 years,the Feds have not upheld them. They did start to rounding them up, but there are Millions out there,so the Feds need to get busy.

    The large batch they hauled in recently, did you see the ICE people come down Rt. One and one place they stopped was the corner of Rt. One and P.Wm. Parkway.Don’t know if they took anyone from there.The other place was P.Wm. Plaza and Todos!
    I guess Todo has choosen his side. Too bad.

  13. S Gonzales said on 30 Jul 2010 at 11:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    Go Corey. Let’s roll!

  14. Groveton said on 31 Jul 2010 at 7:30 am:
    Flag comment

    Is there any provision in the law to prosecute those who hire illegal aliens? To me, that seems necessary to really solve the problem. It is also the only rational defense used by liberals. They claim that conservatives will target the generally poor and often defenseless illegals while ignoring the politically connected employers. That gap must be eliminated. If you like illegals enough to hire them you should also like them enough to spend some time in jail with them.

    As for Saslaw - if stupidity could be bottled the label would read “Saslaw”.

  15. Just the Facts said on 31 Jul 2010 at 8:57 am:
    Flag comment

    Groveton is absolutely right.

    Nothing in Corey’s Virginia Rule of Law proposal even causes an annoyance for employers of illegal aliens (except maybe the part about driving them around). The Arizona law is explicit and effective on employment of illegal aliens. However, none of those provisions are in Corey’s proposed legislation.

    I’m afraid people are listening too much to Corey’s rhetoric and too little to what he is actually doing and proposing. We need action on illegal immigration and that means cracking down on employers.

  16. Greg L said on 31 Jul 2010 at 2:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Several rather legitimate reasons for this: one is the “one object rule” that is already being stretched already here. Two, the legislation is crafted so as not to be directly targeted by the powerful Richmond business lobby. You eat the elephant one bit at a time, and with this stuff you have to be careful about how you do it and strategic about what bites you take first.

    I know the Dems are expressing concerns that employer sanctions aren’t in this bill, and for that I have a simple solution: Any Democrat who wants to introduce an employer sanctions bill is free to contact me for assistance in getting one of these drafted. I’ll do everything I can to help them. Last year Dick Sasllaw worked really hard to put a stop to a bill that did just this introduced by Dave Albo, and if they’ve suddenly seen the light and want to do something here, I’ll do whatever I can to help.

    Absent some sort of indication from Saslaw that he wants a bill like this, or at least won’t move heaven and earth to gut it as he did last year, I don’t take very seriously complaints by Dems that “more important” priorities are being missed. Their record, at least so far, has been distressingly clear.

  17. park'd said on 31 Jul 2010 at 6:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    Wake me when there is a provision in this new act that has to do with firing Deane’s a$$ for insubordination and dereliction of duty. Until then *yawn*.

  18. Just the Facts said on 1 Aug 2010 at 8:17 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg - you and I are on the same page on a great many issues but I’m going to have to differ with you here. It’s not just Democrats pushing for inclusion of employer sanctions. Many of us (Republicans) who want the problem of illegal immigration dealt with effectively see enforcing employment laws and employer sanctions as the best way to go. If there were no jobs for the illegals they would not come here. We would not even need to consider ID checks, and no sanctuary cities would exist.

    The Richmond business lobby is indeed very powerful - no argument there. However, is Corey just going to punt and shoot for some symbolic victory? You are also correct about the “one object rule.” Why not start with the “one object” that would have the most impact in making Virginia an illegal-unfriendly state, namely employer sanctions, then move on to the other items.

    Arizona did not back down back to and quiver in front of business interests. SB 1070 includes solid provisions to crack down on illegal employment, and the judge did not rule an injunction against any of those sections of the bill. None of those measures are included in Corey’s proposed legislation for Virginia.

    To me, Corey’s Virginia Rule of Law campaign is nothing but posturing for upcoming elections and I can’t sign on to something that I know has no chance of solving the illegal alien problem in any meaningful way. Now, if Corey would show some true resolve and backbone, and take on the business interests, including developers, who are the true cause of the illegal immigration problem, I’d be with him one hundred percent.

  19. Anonymous said on 1 Aug 2010 at 11:13 am:
    Flag comment

    Why dosn’t Corry bring back Stirrups original rule of law resolution? You know, the one they gutted just a few weeks after passing the original /good version.

Comments are closed.

Views: 2449