« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Arizona Gets its Day in Court

Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution (the Guarantee Clause) directs the federal government to guarantee the states protection from invasion.  Yet, in the case of Arizona, which has been disproportionately effected by the invasion of illegal aliens and drug cartels, the Obama administration has guaranteed them nothing but lawsuits.

In April 2010, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1070, a bill designed to curb illegal immigration, into law.  Among other things, this law (section 2) requires police officers who were already apprehending suspects for other crimes to check with federal authorities whether that individual is in the country legally.  That inquiry can be made only if there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is an illegal alien.

Instead of working in concert with Arizona to protect its citizens from border-related violence, as prescribed by numerous laws of Congress, the Obama administration filed a lawsuit against Arizona in federal court.  Most egregiously, that lawsuit was first announced by Hillary Clinton while she was overseas.  The administration basically argued that states are preempted from enforcing immigration laws, and because the Obama administration has decided not to enforce those laws, Arizona was supplanting federal authority.  The Obama Justice Department has also filed lawsuits against several other states that have passed similar legislation last year.

On July 28, 2010, federal district judge Susan Bolton issued a preliminary injunction on most of the key components of the law.  That injunction was upheld by the Ninth Circus court last April.  Despite the fact that most of the law has been enjoined for almost two years, the illegal population in Arizona has dropped precipitously.  The law has served as a paradigm for ‘attrition even before enforcement,’ let alone through enforcement.

On Wednesday, Arizona will finally get its day in the Supreme Court, as the highest court in the land hears oral arguments in Arizona v. United States.

Obama’s lawsuit against a state beleaguered by the illegal invasion represents one of the most perverse actions ever taken by the federal government.  This lawsuit should be summarily dismissed by the Supreme Court.  The administration contends that Arizona is preempted from enforcing SB 1070 because the federal government reserves plenary power in immigration enforcement.  It is true that the federal government has plenary power over this issue.  But which branch of the federal government holds that power?  It is Congress that sets immigration power.  And over the years, Congress has passed numerous laws, from Secure Communities to 287(g) provisions that blatantly deputize state and local law enforcement to work harmoniously with the feds in enforcing immigration laws.   So in reality, the Obama administration is preempted by Congress.

While the Obamacare case will clearly be the most important decision to come down from the Supreme Court later this year, Arizona v. United States will be a close second.  Just like in the Obamacare case, the constitutional side will be represented by the inimitable Paul Clement.   And unlike with Obamacare, the public strongly favors upholding the immigration law.  We also have a leg up on the administration with Elena Kagen recusing herself from the case. This decision will clarify basic issues of states’ rights and the rule of law – concepts that are an anathema to this Alinskyite in the White House.

Cross-posted from The Madison Project

COMMENTS

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Just one more… but it’s a big one… enforcing the law or deciding to void the laws on the books through ignoring them and attacking anyone who dares to try and enforce them.

    In my opinion such actions by the current “executive” are essentially treason against the rule of law and by extension, against the country he swore to protect.
    /2c

    • 2warabnvet

      Until the late 19th century immigration was the responsibility of the individual states. As more and more immigrants began pouring in, Americans expressed concern about the “desirability” of some of them. The Federal government took control of the problem with the Immigration Act of 1891. Immigrants were given medical examinations and answered questions intended to weed out undesirables.
      We have now spun 180 degrees. The states are concerned about the flood of illegals, and the Federal government is using its power to hinder state efforts to control the problem. If the situation wasn’t so damaging to our nation it would be funny.

    • tritopic

      You can tell when there is an illegal alien it is called illegal alien disease. “I know first hand” it is called rape treason a threat when an illegal alien is near”. Then finally 5 minutes after the illegal alien has crossed the border they become an false prophet.

      Obama had no right to go against Arizona knowing first hand he to is a false prophet who has raped treasoned threatened me by air venting into my chambers. He is from the Soviet Union right when he became president I remember the aunts were suppose to start marching a liturgical for the unions sway in the UK. And for whatever reason it did not take place. And then listening to the scanners came a name Kiesha Pickens any one recognize this name for repriations. Between America and Africa.

      I over rule this powerful objective of this 2010 law that was passed you know the police should not have to worry about wether or not the person looks suspicous to check if they are an illegal alien.
      sincerly the first home in the chamber of commerce my onyx ring being taken over by illegals.

      • powertothepeople

        Is this guy really a spaced out crack head in withdraw or is this some sort of put on?

        I can just picture this cretin in the park, dancing around, speaking to the air. Think I saw him on an episode of COPS yelling to the cops demanding they not kill his little animal friends in the box who were already dead.

        • acat

          Nobody can prove you’re not a blind dog. Or a spaced out crack head. (although .. I’d say pot head is more likely…)

          I’d suggest watching to see if it posts again .. if nothing else, it should be amusing.

          Mew

          • gekster

            And in the nether regeons of cyberspace.

          • acat

            put it out of our misery.

            Mew

  • checkmate2012

    We’ll see with these two important decisions pending SCOTUS. My prediction, O’care 6-3 and AZ 4-4 and Obama wins…unfortunately due to the lower court ruling. And the fight will go on since the feds aren’t doing their job #1, protecting citizens, yet they won’t let the states enforce federal laws. It’s all show for votes which is shameless.

    Thus the reason Republicans should be talking about protecting the rights of ALL legal citizens and not falling into the dems trap of we’re against hispanics.

    Lastly, Congress should look at the quota limits on legal migration. It makes no sense to deter smart hard-working people in favor of others that just want to come here for a hand out or hand up.

  • lastgopinillinois

    held a hearing (inquisition) into Arizona’s SB-1070 with ChuckU Schumer and Dick Durbin as the inquisitors against former AZ gov Pierce.
    It was a SHAMEFUL spectacle to watch the two communist leaning democrats attempt to miscaracterize the AZ law and use C-Span as a TV show to paint the AZ State law as in-humane.
    Pierce stood his ground and fought back admirably.
    Current Gov Jan Brewer declined to attend the inquisition. Of course, she knew it was just going to be a democrat slanderfest, so she decided not to waste any time with it.
    I just want to clarify this: They are not immigrants, Mr Durbin ! They are ILLEGAL aliens.

    • checkmate2012

      I hope he does draft bill that has no way of passing…the egg is on their face. Shameless indeed. Votes for pawns indeed.

    • JX12

      I assume you’re talking about Russell Pearce, who’s a former Arizona state senator (the one who sponsored SB1070). He wasn’t governor.

      • lastgopinillinois

        NOT former Governor as I mis-stated above.

  • hwgood

    OH, No! And after all our beloved Bam-Bam has done to avoid it!

  • spolson

    into a rino compromiser. On Monday, Romney signaled he was considering a wide range of immigration policies, including a proposal from Florida Sen. Marco Rubio that would allow some of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants a chance at visas to stay in the U.S. No longer a reason to be conservative so we step to the left. It is the “Old school Republican shuffle”.

    • clintonformccain

      The solutions to this problem lie with controlling the inflow, not demagoging about deporting 11 million people. It fantastic for the Republican party to have Marco Rubio to take the visible lead on this issue.

    • gekster

      Our chances for a conservative nominee are past us at this point.
      Like any other politician, he will want to get re-elected (if he does manage to win) and we have to turn him as hard right as we can.
      It will take more of an effort than if he was 100% conservative,
      but we can do that.
      We have our nominee, pretty much, and now is the time to get anyone who is conservative to the other slots open for election, from dog catcher to Senator.
      We can sit and whine about who we got, or we can still do something that will matter.
      The more conservatives in the Congress, the more likely the legislation comeing out of it will be more to our likeing.
      Now is not the time to sit back an bemoan our situation,
      it is the time to get even more involved to achieve our true goals.
      A conservative America.

  • GKC

    I’m not a lawyer but, as I understand it, even with Kagan out, Arizona still needs five votes to prevail because a 4-4 split would not be sufficient to vacate the decision by the Circuit Court.

  • talgus

    how non-action by the enforcement leg of the federal government is the fault of a state. Congress made the law. Does the Constitution care who enforces it? If anything, this is 0′s dereliction of duty. In my mind, a high crime and misdemeanor.