An ill-fitting suit

In attacking Arizona immigration law, administration acting outside Constitution

  • Follow Editorials

The Obama administration has wailed for weeks and weeks now about how the Arizona illegal immigration law will lead to racist arrests and mass civil rights violations.

FILE/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Hundreds supporting Arizona’s new law on illegal immigration listened to speakers near Phoenix in June. At the heart of the debate over Arizona’s tough new immigration law is frustration with how the U.S. deals with the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants within its borders.

Oddly enough, though, when it came time to actually make a legal case in its lawsuit against the state, the administration focused on other arguments. Hmm. Wonder why.

Could it be that the administration has finally read the Arizona law? And that it's become clear the administration has no case -- that the Arizona law actually does more to protect against civil rights violations than the existing federal law it mostly parallels?

Instead, the administration is hanging its hat on the argument that the state has infringed on a federal responsibility.

We can't wait for that testimony! We want to hear all about how the federal government has lived up to its obligations.

As a sovereign state, and as a free people, Arizona and its residents have a God-given right to protect themselves against such things as illegal immigration. The federal government is trying to stop the state from protecting itself, while passing down the costs of illegal immigration -- estimated by one watchdog organization to be $113 billion a year nationally, $2.6 billion in Arizona alone.

Meanwhile, "sanctuary city" policies -- in which municipalities openly invite federal law-breaking by promising not to report illegal aliens -- are tacitly approved by this and prior administrations.

We have a question that we hope the court answers in the course of this lawsuit: Does this or any other presidential administration have the right to ignore certain laws and enforce others? Or are acts of Congress binding on them?

By its tolerance of sanctuary policies and its lawsuit against those who would actually attempt to enforce the law, the Obama administration is arguably acting outside the U.S. Constitution.

Now, that's a lawsuit we'd like to see.

Lawmakers in Oklahoma, Utah and South Carolina next year could pass legislation similar to Arizona's. What will Mr. Obama do then? Sue them all?

It's an unseemly and frightening development -- the federal government that was created by the states turning around and attempting to subjugate them to the federal will at the point of a legal bayonet.

We don't think Mr. Obama has a prayer in this case. But if he should somehow win, we wonder if the union itself has one.

Comments (73) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/08/10 - 11:00 pm
0
0
What if Obama-Holder win the

What if Obama-Holder win the court case against Arizona? What if Arizona refuses to stop enforcing the law? Will Obama send federal troops into Arizona as was done in the south in the 60's to enforce school desegregation?

Imagine this, we will have federal troops acting against Arizona law enforcement officers who are trying to enforce the law while illegals rampage across the state and country as more and more pour across the "border."

Tell me things haven't become absurd.

Insider Information
4009
Points
Insider Information 07/08/10 - 10:50 pm
0
0
My question is this... If the

My question is this... If the federal government is arguing that local law enforcement officers lack the authority to enforce federal law, then does that mean local police are forbidden from arresting terrorists? Terrorism is a federal crime and a federal issue. Would the feds sue a local police officer if he were to arrest Bin Laden? Can we pick and choose what federal laws locals can and can't enforce?

KSL
129965
Points
KSL 07/08/10 - 11:02 pm
0
0
@ Riverman1, if he can find

@ Riverman1, if he can find troops to send to Arizona to enforce the winning of the case, won't he have trouble explaining why he couldn't send them to enforce the Federal laws in the first place. His feet will definitely need to be held to the fire.

Actually, he's in a no win situation. He just isn't as smart as many people who elected him have believed him to be. A lot of others who supported him were fully aware that he wasn't so brilliant and took full advantage of that fact.

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/08/10 - 11:52 pm
0
0
"@ Riverman1, if he can find

"@ Riverman1, if he can find troops to send to Arizona to enforce the winning of the case, won't he have trouble explaining why he couldn't send them to enforce the Federal laws in the first place."

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Know what, the more I think about this thing, the more I believe the courts will slap this Democrat led suit beside the head like Deacon Jones (SC State grad) used to do to offensive linemen before the NFL head slapping rules were enacted. The courts ALWAYS come up with solutions that are reasonable. The county judge FINDS a way to make the right decision as I believe the federal courts will.

All the judges will realize there's no way the absurd situation we all see coming can be enforced.

soldout
1280
Points
soldout 07/09/10 - 05:02 am
0
0
good thoughts, good comments

good thoughts, good comments

Rhetor
1011
Points
Rhetor 07/09/10 - 06:00 am
0
0
The Obama administration has

The Obama administration has not made the bizarre, overstated claims that the LTE alleges. Nor has the adminstration said that local law authorities can't enforce federal law; in fact, they have said the opposite. Their argument that the states can't engage in foreign policy is valid. Furthermore, for the President's authority on this matter, I refer the writer to the 6th Article of the Constitution. Finally, a President with less than two years in office has already cut illegal immigration to its lowest level in living memory--and has sent troops to further address the problem--and the conservatives are complaining about this! There is no logic whatsoever to your positions; the only consistency is that you good people attack Obama for everything, including when he does what you want.

carcraft
25940
Points
carcraft 07/09/10 - 06:20 am
0
0
Rhetor-The foreign policy WAS

Rhetor-The foreign policy WAS established by the letter of the FEDERAL law concerning illegal aliens! What part of Federal law and policy was changed by Arizona? I really don't think inaction can be discribed as a federal policy, how would you like to argue that in court? Obama screwed up when he berated the Supreme court during his State of the Union address. SCOTUS is going to remind Obama that they are a seperate, equal, and independant part of government-being a constitutional professor Obama should have known this! LOL

carcraft
25940
Points
carcraft 07/09/10 - 06:20 am
0
0
How are the Federal trials of

How are the Federal trials of terrorists in New York going? Just some thought on the great legal minds in this administration!!

55 F-100
1
Points
55 F-100 07/09/10 - 06:29 am
0
0
The rest of the nation

The rest of the nation supporting Arizona througout this debacle will keep everyone intent on the task at hand, i.e. to vote out the obamazombies in November 2010, and to vote out the muslim community organizer in November 2012.

OnlyinAgs1
0
Points
OnlyinAgs1 07/09/10 - 06:38 am
0
0
HATE so early in the AM 55

HATE so early in the AM 55 F-100

johnston.cliff
2
Points
johnston.cliff 07/09/10 - 06:40 am
0
0
LOL, Rhetor @ 6:00a. Funny

LOL, Rhetor @ 6:00a. Funny stuff. If nobody on this site had ever read anything about the border situation and had never seen a tv show about it or had never heard a radio show about it, your post might make sense.

Runner46
0
Points
Runner46 07/09/10 - 07:14 am
0
0
Concerning the troops

Concerning the troops possibly sent to Arizona, They would need to be National Guard troops, citizen soldiers. There are laws in place regarding the use of federal troops within U.S. borders. It's not allowed. Would NG troops actually allow themselves to be used in this manner, considering the majority national opinion of SB-1070? Obama should be focusing on removing illegal aliens, not helping them to remain in the U.S.

corgimom
32611
Points
corgimom 07/09/10 - 07:25 am
0
0
"Finally, a President with

"Finally, a President with less than two years in office has already cut illegal immigration to its lowest level in living memory"

Obama hasn't cut anything more than a piece of paper with some scissors. The worst recession in 75 years, and no jobs, has cut illegal immigration.

seabeau
33
Points
seabeau 07/09/10 - 07:48 am
0
0
Runner46, In 1957 Pres.D.

Runner46, In 1957 Pres.D. Eisenhower sent 1000 members of the 101 Airborne Division to Little Rock Ark. in order to implement a Federal Court Order that all Public Schools be intergrated. The 101 was NOT a National Guard Unit.

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/09/10 - 08:05 am
0
0
Seabeau is right. Federal

Seabeau is right. Federal troops have been used many times within our borders. Remember the race riots in Detroit and other cities in the 60s and 70s? Armor units with tanks were even used.

So again, I ask how can Obama enforce any ruling that says what AZ is doing is against the law... if AZ refuses to comply? Military troops pulling over highway patrolmen? Troops arresting county law enforcement officers? Arresting state government officials? What if the other 17 states considering enacting the AZ law immediately act? Going to send troops there too?

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 07/09/10 - 08:07 am
0
0
only: 55's hate is 24/7. "the

only: 55's hate is 24/7. "the costs of illegal immigration -- estimated by one watchdog organization to be $113 billion a year nationally, $2.6 billion in Arizona alone." So now the AC is resorting to anonymous sources. I guess you have to when you keep citing sources with ties to white supremacists, neo Nazis, anti Semites, and eugunics supporters. Why not just say it came from John Tanton's group FAIR? Possibly because they, and many of Tanton's other efforts are classified as hate groups.

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/09/10 - 08:20 am
0
0
From the Cato Institute

From the Cato Institute concerning the authority to use federal troops:

"n addition, there is the Insurrection Act of 1808, as amended in 2007, (Title 10, Section 331 of the U.S. Code) under which the president can authorize troops “to restore order and enforce the laws of the United States” in an insurrection.

“Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection,” the law states.

In 2007, Congress expanded the list to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition” as situations for which the president can authorize troops, provided that “domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the state or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.”

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/09/10 - 08:38 am
0
0
Uh oh, Techfan is pulling out

Uh oh, Techfan is pulling out the neoNazi, white supremacist vocabulary.

snoopdawg99
0
Points
snoopdawg99 07/09/10 - 08:54 am
0
0
A short spelling lesson:

A short spelling lesson:

The last four letters in "American" = I Can

The last four letters in "Republican" = I Can

The last four letters in "Democrats"= Rats

End of Lesson.

Test to follow in November.

November will be set aside as rodent extermination month.

carcraft
25940
Points
carcraft 07/09/10 - 08:55 am
0
0
When lost for logic and facts

When lost for logic and facts the left can always play the name calling or race card game...

FaceTheMusic
0
Points
FaceTheMusic 07/09/10 - 09:08 am
0
0
"One watchdog organization."

"One watchdog organization." And what organization would that be, AC?

overburdened_taxpayer
117
Points
overburdened_taxpayer 07/09/10 - 09:11 am
0
0
Donations have been pouring

Donations have been pouring in from around the country to help fund Arizona's defense of the suit brought by Obama/Holder. If you wish to contribute to this fight go to http://www.keepazsafe.com and show the feds that citizens believe that states still have the right to police in their own states.

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 07/09/10 - 09:10 am
0
0
When there are ties to these

When there are ties to these kinds of groups, especially when the AC turns to them as sources, you bet I'm going to point them out. River, I know you are smart enough to do research. Try FAIR, The Pioneer Fund, and Tanton. See what groups they are involved with, and what books his groups publish and what authors they push. There is too much playing the race card and inversly, racism on these posts. When the shoe fits, however, I feel it is appropriate to point out the ties that these groups have.

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/09/10 - 09:16 am
0
0
Tech, you really have to

Tech, you really have to define "ties."

Before I commented above I went to the Southern Povery Law Center to read an "opposing" view of FAIR. All they say is some members of FAIR support racist organizations. There is no documentation or anything. The official policies of FAIR don't seem racist to me. They do support English only in schools and government, but that's not racist.

To say they are Nazis and racist is like me saying the Democratic Party believes in killing white babies because Shabazz, a Democratic supporter, said it.

lsmith
105
Points
lsmith 07/09/10 - 09:20 am
0
0
Laughable suit and dubious
Unpublished

Laughable suit and dubious argument. The Arizona Law takes nothing away from the Federal Governments position on Immigation other than reinforcing it. If the Feds don't want states involved in immigration arrests, the answer is simple, do it yourself. If you don't have the time, manpower or conviction, step aside and accept our help.
IF you can'T offer anything to help us, SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP!!!!

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 07/09/10 - 09:21 am
0
0
Search some of Tanton's

Search some of Tanton's quotes. Look at the numerous groups he founded and their ties and look at the books his The Social Contract Press publishes and pushes.

dichotomy
33039
Points
dichotomy 07/09/10 - 09:29 am
0
0
The current regime is using

The current regime is using the powers of the federal government against it's own citizens to promote their racist, socialist agenda. Eric (Malcom X) Holder refuses to prosecute black thugs threatening white people at voting places and is using the DOJ to attempt to prevent the people of Arizona from protecting themselves against murderers, rapist, drug dealers, and financial dealth by welfare payments. Barrack (Hugo Chaves) Obama just appointed a socialist to run Medicare who believes that he must make healthcare worse and more expensive for working people in order to GIVE good healthcare to non-working, non-productive welfare leeches. We have a regime in power that hates working people, hates white people, hates businesses, hates banks, and loves everything communist. Wake up people. Don't listen to Obama's lying speaches, but instead watch his actions and the actions of his DOJ. Pay attention to the communists he has appointed to office. Pay attention to how they have lied to you about the cost of Obamacare while you watch your insurance premiums skyrocket. Pay attention to the "commission" Obama has stacked that will be raising your taxes, after the November elections. Pay attention to the DOJ which refuses to prosecute black thugs intimidating white voters and poll workers. Pay attention to the DOJ which sues a state for wanting to enforce a law identical to the federal law which the DOJ will not enforce. Pay attention to the communist Obama just appointed without Senate confirmation to run Medicare/Medicaid who brags that we must redistribute your income to pay for the welfare entitlement leeches. And we all know what kind of liberal, anti-white, anti-corporate, socialists Obama has nominated for the two Supreme Court positions. If the blatant racist, communist pattern of this president, his appointees, and the Democrat controlled Congress has not slapped you up side you head by now then you are totally numb skulled. I am not saying that the Republicans were great either but at least I never felt like my government was attacking me and taking my money to pay for it in addition to telling me I had to support 3 or 4 other people who hate me. "You have to start killing some crackers. You have to kill some of their children". DOJ says......FREE PASS for the panthers..let's sue Arizona and sue to put thousands of oil drillers out of work instead. And Obama says.....while you guys are doing that I will appoint a Medicare guy to take some more working folk's money, reduce the quality of their medical care, and give it to my people. Then we will raise their taxes after the election. Cut spending...no no no...we can't do that. Got to keep that money spigot flowing to my voters. This Democrat regime is comprised of outright Communist, chic liberal "white guilt" Socialist, hardcore anti-white Racists, and ultra left wing nutcase environmentalists. How many times do you have to be hit up side the head America??? Get involved and take action to remove this regime from power while there is a chance to reverse the damage and recover.

seabeau
33
Points
seabeau 07/09/10 - 10:11 am
0
0
Riverman1 Its appears that

Riverman1 Its appears that the Insurrection Act of 1808 might be in conflict with the Second Admentment fo the Constitution. And as we all know, laws passed by Congress,(Statue Law) cannot violate the Constitution. Also using The Southern Poverty Law site as a validation point is a best shakey. They express extreme leftist views,and they themselves ,Morris Dees and his cronies have been subject of several investigations for fraud.

Riverman1
84123
Points
Riverman1 07/09/10 - 10:36 am
0
0
Seabeau, you missed my point.

Seabeau, you missed my point. I went to the "extreme leftist" site because I wanted to find examples of the concerns of those who are opposed to FAIR. I found nothing legitimate, only generalizations.

As far as the 1808 Act that was amended in 2007, you voice legitimate concerns that it could be unconstitutional, but the facts are as you said above, Federal troops have been used, and as I added, many times. The courts have not disapproved so far.

ohhsweetconcord
3
Points
ohhsweetconcord 07/09/10 - 10:45 am
0
0
Ohhh, so frightening. Sorry,

Ohhh, so frightening. Sorry, but the Union won the Civil War, the New Deal was enacted, and...surprise surprise...the states definitely don't have the authority to make local police officers immigration officials. That would leave us with a patchwork of different policies all in different states with different concerns for different citizens traveling there.

Arizona will loose this lawsuit. I wish they could loose it on discriminatory grounds, but that's too hard to prove, especially since the law hasn't even been enacted yet. And most of the law will stand, cause there are some common sense statutes that need to be enforced. But the law goes too far in the end.

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs