Supreme Court rules on Arizona and immigration
SCOTUS handed down a couple of big decisions, but not the one we were all talking about—that wily old SCOTUS.
It will take a while for everyone to chew and digest today’s decisions, which are only appetizers compared to the HCR ruling coming down the pike, perhaps on Thursday. But here’s my quick reaction to one of them.
The Court’s decision in Arizona v. US can be summarized as follows: the federal government is boss in immigration law. If the federal government wants to ignore its own federal immigration laws and refuse to enforce them, a state can’t pass its own laws that are more stringent than the federal ones on the books. But the state can ask those suspected of crimes to produce papers showing they are citizens, although that’s only allowed because the federal government already “requires immigration officials to respond to status checks from local authorities.”
Here’s an example of exactly how the reasoning works:
Although federal law already makes it illegal for someone to be in the country without proper authorization, Section 3 of the Arizona statute also makes it a state crime, subject to additional fines and possible imprisonment. The Court held that this provision was preempted and cannot be enforced. The Court held that Congress has left no room for states to regulate in this field, even to implement the federal prohibition.
Makes perfect sense if the federal government was making any sense—that is, if it was enforcing its own laws. But it’s not, so Arizona is more or less powerless.
Each side is claiming victory, although I see this as somewhat more of a victory for the Obama side. However, it’s an odd one, since it leaves the provision the Obama forces most objected to intact, and it also (if people understand what’s being said here) could easily lead a person to conclude that the only way to change this and make the government enforce its own laws would be to change administrations in November.
Of course, the overarching reality is that it has become an overwhelming and practically impossible task to effectively enforce our immigration laws—and that although it would be nice to get some sort of clarity, where our laws are in line with our policy, all suggestions to do so are pretty wildly unpopular to one faction or another, either because they are too Draconian or too lenient.
[ADDENDUM: Reports are that the federal government will just pretty much ignore what Arizona does anyway:
…[P]olice [in Arizona] can immediately begin calling to check immigration status ”” but federal officials are likely to reject most of those calls.
Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.
As I wrote above, Arizona is powerless to make the feds enforce their own laws if the feds don’t want to. And they don’t want to.]
I guess that means that each illegal alien gets one free felony before the Feds will pick him up.
One big problem the strategy of filling America with third world voters is that sooner or later one of two things has to happen, both of which doom the method to failure. Either the third world voters do not turn into wealth producers, and bankrupt the system, whereby the system collapses and is rebuilt reaffirming the values and traditions because people want prosperity even more than just the promise of prosperity, or, the third world voters do turn into wealth producers and really do want to keep their wealth and are found to be not at all the socialists the illiberals thought.
Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.
Ah, so we’re continuing the “catch and release” program.
Here’s a modest proposal: bus all those caught to Beverly Hills or Malibu, and drop them off there.
Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record.
But illegal entry into the US is already a felony.
SO, the key word isn’t “felony” it is “conviction”. And, if the Feds won’t convict for immigration violations …
I think it will backfire; it’s a lawless administration that believes in ever more government. That is quite scary and the public will take notice.
Why don’t we just ask Mexico if they want to become part of the United States?
Number one, we will crush your drug overlords and number two we will flood your country with investment and technology. Does minimum wage sound good? How about some nice highways and sewers and hospitals? Don’t judge by LA standards, those are laughed at even by us. How about we open up milllions of energy jobs to you while you open up to us your beautiful climate and beaches to our retiring generation? And how many of our old people would like a caring and responsible caregiver? How many four bedroom houses are empty in our country which would be better filled with the sounds of children and pets and cooking and life? Sound like a good trade? You’ll have to learn English? And become American? Can you do it? So far, it looks like you want to come to America and make it Mexico.
Holmes, the public has had three years to notice that Obama is losing wars, wrecking the economy, destroying alliances, releasing state secrets, ignoring the legal system, undermining sovereignty and now all of a sudden they are going to notice that he effectively is ruling illegally by fiat?
I was just visiting ABC’s website. They don’t seem to be playing up the story, as not as much as a nudist shopping spree in Germany. The public is not even aware that Obama is not obeying the spirit or the letter of the law, let alone it’s significance.
I wonder what he will do after re-election now that he’s got the Hispanic vote sewn up in CO, FL, MI and VA? There are still a few pieces of America he has not finished off, like talk radio and an unregulated internet, and term limits for Presidents. I am sure he will lose the popular vote so at least Congress should at least provide a speed bump. But we already know how little he cares for such trivia as the law.
I suspect we will be living a a modified dictatorship in a few months, with the only real law Obama’s whim.
“I suspect we will be living a a modified dictatorship in a few months, with the only real law Obama’s whim.”
In PC terms: Every man, woman, transgender, child for him/her/it self; Obama against all. 😉
I agree that BHO is definitely a dictator wannabe. But I have faith that deep inside 5% of the people are made of stern stuff. 5% = 15.5 million. Bring it on Barry.
Occam’s Beard, too late. They’re already here. Who do you think cleans our houses, minds our children, mows our lawns, buses our restaurant tables, parks our cars, and cooks our food?
“Why don’t we just ask Mexico if they want to become part of the United States?”
It has also occurred to me that Obama is in the process of turning Arizona over to Mexico. MOVE that border!
Would McCain have been better on this issue? Would Bush? They may have not refused to enforce the laws quite as openly as Obama but they probably would not have secured the border either. The Supreme Court seems to have blown this decision. if the federal government cannot be trusted to enforce the law, then the states (especially the border states) need the authority to deal with illegal immigration. Since Obama has just said they will ignore calls from Arizona authorities, Arizona should now sue the feds.
Curtis, with regard to third world voter’s. The Latinos come from countries with a patron system, that is some rich guy or populist politician, takes it upon himself to provide for the little people in return for their support, self reliance and freedom be damned because it cannot happen in the societies they come from. I suspect that is what Obama is trying to pull off here. A patron system with himself as Juan Peron/Chavez/Zelaya/Erdogan. It has always proven an effective way to undermine democracies.
I think this will eventually backfire with regard to the Cuban-Americans because of their experiences with populist politicians.
You are undoubtedly correct Bob from Virginia. Admittedly, my view is optimistic. You are right about the patron system. And even more, we see it is the rule that some of the second and third generations of immigrants lose the work ethic of their parents whilst the generations of the patron immigrants–well, we don’t know yet.
But on the other hand, some of the second and third generations do not lose the work ethic and some of the patron generations we believe will discover it.
Pingback:Texas passes border law: will it stand? - The New Neo