« Biden Sees Iraq Success For Obama ~ GAG! So Many Lies Joe and Iraq Knows The Truth! | Main | LOL ....Does a former Drill Sergeant make a terrible therapist? You be the judge. »
July 07, 2010
America Hating Obama Sues To Throw Out Arizona Immigration Law
The Mexican Mafia has given a "green light" to take out Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu. A "green light" indicates that the assassin given the order must complete the murder or he will be killed himself, as will his family.
"I understand this threat, yet I will not run in fear or change my support for SB1070 and my demands for President Obama to secure our border with 3,000 armed soldiers in Arizona and start building the fence again. I'm always armed and as every law enforcement member knows, we always have to be aware of our surroundings and possible threats," he said.
.
We've expected it for weeks, and now we have it. The DoJ has just filed suit, arguing that SB1070 "violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution".
They will seek an injunction to delay the July 29th implementation date of the law. 1070 architect Kris Kobach says the suit is 100% political and will fail in court, as the... law was "specifically crafted" to anticipate such a challenge. Regardless of the outcome, it is disgraceful that the Federal government, given stories such as Sheriff Babeau's below, is making Arizona the enemy, and defending the enemies of the rule of law.
Co-author Russell Pierce rightfully called the suit an "absolute insult to the rule of law" as well as to Arizona and its residents. It is all that and more. The die is cast. This is much bigger than Arizona now. We will punish those who have done this on November 2nd. SWA will publish detailed records on border security and amnesty of every Representative up for election this year. ANGRY? REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER. That will be the "Peoples' Injunction".
For now...contact your Reps:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/
.
Gov't sues to throw out Arizona immigration law
PHOENIX
The Obama administration sued Arizona on Tuesday to throw out the state's toughest-in-the-nation immigration law and keep other states from copying it.
The lawsuit filed in federal court in Phoenix said the law, due to take effect July 29, usurps the federal government's "pre-eminent authority" under the Constitution to regulate immigration.
The move sets the stage for a high-stakes legal clash over states' rights at a time when politicians in some other states have indicated they want to follow Arizona's lead.
The legal action represents a stern denunciation of the law, which the Justice Department declared will "cause the detention and harassment of authorized visitors, immigrants and citizens who do not have or carry identification documents" while ignoring "humanitarian concerns" and harming diplomatic relations.
Supporters of the law said the lawsuit was unnecessary and blamed the federal government for neglecting problems at the border for years. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer called the complaint "a terribly bad decision" and defended the law as "reasonable and constitutional."
Other states have said they want to take similar action - a scenario the government cited as a reason for bringing the lawsuit.
"The Constitution and the federal immigration laws do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country," the suit says.
The heart of the legal arguments focus on the Constitution's assertion that federal laws override state laws. The lawsuit says that comprehensive federal laws already on the books cover illegal immigration - and that those statutes take precedent.
"In our constitutional system, the federal government has pre-eminent authority to regulate immigration matters," the lawsuit says. "This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress. The nation's immigration laws reflect a careful and considered balance of national law enforcement, foreign relations, and humanitarian interests."
The lawsuit also says that the Arizona measure will impose a huge burden on U.S. agencies in charge of enforcing immigration laws, "diverting resources and attention from the dangerous aliens who the federal government targets as its top enforcement priority."
The court filing states that Arizona law is pre-empted by federal law and therefore violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The filing makes no assertion that the law is discriminatory or risks being applied in a discriminatory fashion, as the president and other officials said they feared would be the case. Interestingly, this suit makes no civil rights charges against the Arizona law.
The next step is for the case to be assigned a judge, who will decide whether to grant a preliminary injunction to temporarily block the law from taking effect.
Brewer predicted that the law would survive the federal challenge as well as pending suits previously filed by private groups and individuals.
"As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice," Brewer said. "Today's filing is nothing more than a massive waste of taxpayer funds."
State Sen. Russell Pearce, the principal sponsor of the bill co-sponsored by dozens of fellow Republican legislators, denounced the lawsuit as "absolute insult to the rule of law" as well as to Arizona and its residents.
The Mexican government welcomed the move, saying the law "affects the civil and human rights of thousands of Mexicans."
UPDATE:
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, released a statement saying: “Suing the people of Arizona for attempting to do a job the federal government has utterly failed to execute will not help secure our borders. If the President wants to make real progress on this issue, he can do so by taking amnesty off the table and focus his efforts on border and interior security. It is long past time for this administration to prioritize solving a crisis over imposing an agenda and the first step is to recognize that attorneys and amnesty are not acceptable alternatives to border security and job creation.”
.
Arizona Democrats running as fast as they can away from Obama.
Arizona Dems contest Obama's assertions on border security
Anticipating a furor of voter criticism over the July Fourth recess, Democratic lawmakers from the border region shot back at the White House last week, challenging the president’s speech on immigration in which he said that the southern border is secure.
Arizona Democratic Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick, Harry Mitchell and Gabrielle Giffords joined a growing Republican chorus in denouncing President Barack Obama for not pushing for more specific action in his Thursday speech on the nation’s immigration and border security issues.
Obama said that the U.S.-Mexico border is more secure today than at any time in the past 20 years. But the three Arizona Democrats disagreed.
.
Wild Thing's comment..........
"The Mexican government welcomed the move, saying the law "affects the civil and human rights of thousands of Mexicans."
Civil and human rights of ILLEGALS???? WTH!
The filing makes no assertion that the law is discriminatory or risks being applied in a discriminatory fashion
So the “profiling” screams from these crybabies doesn’t hold legal muster after all. Because the law is NOT discriminatory nor unconstitutional. Even if there was the slightest chance it was, wouldn’t the DOJ press it now? This vindicates SB1070.
Posted by Wild Thing at July 7, 2010 06:50 AM
Comments
My hope is that each state will pass their own immigration laws. I also wish they would go after employers of illegals. That would solve most of the problem right there. Also, laws against anchor babies.
Posted by: TomR,armed in Texas at July 7, 2010 10:28 AM
Since when has Mexico ever worried about civil rights?
The Mexican drug cartels feel they have the green light to go after Arizona officials. After all, the Feds are going after them.
Posted by: BobF at July 7, 2010 11:36 AM
The Constitution supposed to restrict the feds, not the states.
Posted by: Fresno Financial Consultant at July 7, 2010 12:39 PM
State and local cops are expected to bust people for counterfeiting, bank robbery and kidnapping, even though those are "federal" and not state or local offenses, so what's the difference?
Posted by: Anonymous at July 7, 2010 02:45 PM
Screw Mexico, it's an oil-producing nation and still a corrupt third-world sh*thole that sends 10% of its population here to get 20% of its GNP.
Posted by: Anonymous at July 7, 2010 02:59 PM
I agree I hope more and more States join in and the hell with what Mexico thinks about this. They have a lot of nerve saying what we 'have ' to do to make them happy. sheesh
Posted by: Wild Thing at July 7, 2010 06:21 PM
Last count 13 States are considering similar law like Arizona.
Posted by: Mark at July 7, 2010 09:23 PM
