The question asked of the President's men by the brilliant Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia in today's hearing about whether to overturn the Arizona Law was direct: what does sovereignty - the clear power reserved to the states in America - mean if it does not include the ability to defend your borders?
Arizona presently has a staggering 360,000 illegal immigrants residing within its borders. The Supreme Court is being asked by the Obama Administration, as part of its ongoing "war against the states," to invalidate their "Arizona Law" (HB 1070) attempt to enforce existing law and stem what is literally an invasion by neighboring Mexico.
The one issue not being argued before the U.S. Supreme Court today as the Arizona Law to enforce U.S. immigration law, are the tactics of terrorism aimed at voting immigrants in America to stampede them into voting straight Democrat and reelecting President Obama.
All Latinos would be treated as potential lawbreakers whose papers must be continuously checked, goes the Obama argument in seeking to persuade the Supreme Court
Racial profiling by police officers would mean that anyone who is brown skinned on the streets in Arizona could be stopped by a police officer and if they do not have their "papers" could then be thrown in jail.
The especially disgusting tactic of accusing people who simply want to enforce existing law against illegal immigration of being racists and scaring the heck out of every legal immigrant of brown skin in America is the basic core of the Obama argument before the Supreme Court.
But the audience for this argument is not simply the Supreme Court.
The audience that these arguments are really aimed at are Latino and all immigrant voters who are scared to death that they and their children, friends, brothers, cousins - will all be targeted by police and thrown in jail.
These tactics attributed to police in advance, are actually not in any way part of HB 1077, popularly known as "The Arizona Law."
The facts are simple.
If you already have a law - as we do in Pennsylvania - that you must carry auto insurance, can a police officer stop anyone he wants and demand "papers please"? No. Emphatically, NO.
The police officer is supposed to already HAVE a reason to stop you - such as catching you speeding - before he can stop you. And at that point he may ask for evidence that you carry insurance and that your car is registered.
If someone is a visitor to America from another country they must similarly, by law, carry their papers to document that they are here legally.
And just like with the insurance papers, although this is the law, it does not mean that they can be stopped by any officer simply because they appear to be a foreigner, and be required to show their papers.
They must FIRST have given the officer a reason to stop them in order for the 2nd question - are you here legally - to ever come up.
And even then, unlike the example of the insurance papers, the police officer must have what is called "reasonable suspicion" in order to even ask about your immigration status.
That is the Arizona Law.
It is an accusation against police officers that they cannot be trusted but will instead ignore the law and go ahead and randomly stop any brown skinned people that they see on the streets and demand they produce "papers" to prove their legal status in America or if they cannot, they will be tossed in jail.
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" may not be the argument before today's Supreme Court hearing on the Arizona Law but Americans of Christian and Jewish faith ought to be asking, how can the Obama administration make such an unwarranted accusation - a smear - without being called to task for it?
There is nothing being done by Arizona which violates the fourth amendment, which reads: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
There was no evidence presented before the U.S. Supreme Court today to back up the very implicit accusation that police officers are guilty of such illegal behavior in Arizona, nor that the Arizona Law sanctions such clearly illegal behavior.
So whether it is the law which requires you to carry insurance on your car and to carry the documents with you when you drive your car, or the law which requires aliens to carry their documents which show they are legally allowed to be in America, either way the law already does require these papers to be carried, but does not give police officers the power to simply stop Americans with the demand that the papers must be produced.
It is a lie to claim that the Arizona law allows police officers the power to stop people and search them without first establishing "probable cause" for a crime.
The sole purpose of such a claim is to frighten immigrants who are in America legally.
The suggestion that those who support the Arizona law are bigots out to harass and frighten legal immigrants is unfair and is in fact a cynical ploy to boost voter turnout for Barack Obama and his Democratic Party.
It is a blatant lie about the Arizona police, against those who passed the "Arizona Law" and against all of us who support enforcement of existing immigration law rather than ignoring it as the Obama administration is doing in order to build a larger base of proven votes.
Americans have every right to demand that the existing law prohibiting illegal immigration should be enforced. It has nothing to do with Christian charity towards visitors. It has everything to do with the rule of law and "thou shalt not steal" by jumping in line ahead of all those immigrants who came to America legally to build a life in the land they now call home.
The Obama administration's central purpose in brazenly arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court that Arizona and the states should not be allowed to enforce existing law is to blatantly appeal to immigrants in general and Hispanics in particular that their very lives in America are imperiled unless this President and his party are left in power on election day 2012.
Such terror tactics by the President and his allies against uninformed people, are both un-Christian and un-American and should be denounced at every opportunity.
HanoverHenry of RED STATE is Pat Henry on Facebook, and I'm on the lookout for new friends there. You can also communicate via private mail at Facebook, and I welcome new sources for my articles focusing on the conservative-Christian viewpoint in Pennsylvania. I appreciate your sharing this article elsewhere and only ask that you include this "disclaimer" in any reprints or sharing you do. And I thank those whose information have helped me with some of my reports, including those who do not wish to be quoted by name.
Links to articles I wrote at RED STATE at my Facebook Notes section.