[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

In Year Two, Obamacare’s Off to Another Bad Start

Obamacare offers firms $3,000 incentive to hire illegals over native-born workers

Car plows through protesters during Ferguson rally in south Minneapolis

**Media Shock**: New York Times Publishes Darren Wilson’s Address Info

MOST BUSINESSES DESTROYED IN FERGUSON MINORITY OWNED

Judge Greenlights Lawsuit Against Guest-Worker Program Expanded by Executive Amnesty

CNN AIRS CLIP OF MICHAEL BROWN’S STEPDAD SHOUTING 'BURN THIS BITCH DOWN'

Missouri Lt. Gov. Rips Gov. Nixon Over Lack of National Guard Presence in Ferguson

Michael Brown shooting: What Darren Wilson told the Ferguson grand jury

Chuck Schumer: Passing Obamacare in 2010 Was a Mistake

Yep! They all came together and the result was seen last night.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE CHUCK HAGEL RESIGNS

ST. LOUIS POLICE OFFICER DOWN! U-City Cop Shot – Condition Unknown

Libya, Isis, Rioting In Kiev: Hagel Didn’t Start the Fire

REPORTS: FERGUSON GRAND JURY HAS REACHED DECISION

Ferguson Protesters Vandalize St. Louis City Landmark

‘Man Spreaders,’ There’s No Excuse for Not Closing Your Legs on the Subway

Four words that could deep-six Obamacare

Brat: 'Not one thin dime' for Obama's immigration plan

How Hollywood Accounting Can Make a $450 Million Movie 'Unprofitable'

Impeach President Obama—Why When Where and How

Georgia Man Shoots & Kills Man Who Mistakenly Pulled Into Driveway; Misdemeanor, $500 Fine (Castle Doctrine)

The Benghazi Brief – “Operation Zero Footprint” – What We Know About The Benghazi Mission, And Subsequent Attack

Ferguson Protests Grow Larger: ‘We Don’t Give a F--- about Your Laws’

How $10,000 In The Bank In 2008 Lost Over $7000 Of Wealth by 2013

The Use and Abuse of Executive Orders and Other Presidential Directives

BREAKING REPORT: DOJ Is Threatening #Ferguson Prosecutor With Bias Order Over No Indictment

‘Now, That’s What I Call a Friday News Dump’: Final Report Released After Two-Year Investigation Into Benghazi

Security Experts: What to do if protesters surround your car.

Liberal 2016 poll: Elizabeth Warren beating Clinton by double digits

FBI arrests two in connection with plot to set off bomb during protests - Ferguson

Arpaio v Obama, DCDC 14-cv-01966, Doc 1 COMPLAINT

Obama’s Amnesty Is The Act Of A Rogue President

Bandits in Guinea steal blood samples believed to be infected with Ebola

30,000 missing emails from IRS' Lerner recovered

House of Representatives v Burwell (COMPLAINT)

Obama releases Gitmo detainees, setting up fight with GOP

Texas Leaders Ready to Fight After Obama's Executive Action

HOUSE FILES CHALLENGE OVER THE CHANGES TO THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

Will Scripted Ferguson Agenda Overshadow the Executive Amnesty Announcement?

Diplomat dumps burqa-clad fiancée due to crossed-eyes, beard

U.S. Senate Votes Against Freedom in the USA (Again)

Sheriff Joe Arpaio Files Lawsuit Against Obama over Amnesty Executive Order

HILLARY CLINTON: 'I SUPPORT THE PRESIDENT'S DECISION'

Patriots Headed to White House; Arrest Obama NOW! Pete Santilli Interviews US Marine Manny Vega

JEFF SESSIONS: NOW IS ‘TIME TO STAND STRONG’ AGAINST OBAMA’S ILLEGAL AMNESTY TO PROTECT AMERICAN WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES

Reagan and Bush Offer No Precedent for Obama's Amnesty Order

Bachmann to America: Come to D.C. on Dec. 3 & Rally to 'Defund Amnesty'

No, Reagan Did Not Offer An Amnesty By Lawless Executive Order

No, ‘Prosecutorial Discretion’ Does Not Justify Obama’s Lawless Amnesty


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Mexican Invasion
See other Mexican Invasion Articles

Title: Supreme Court signals support for Arizona immigration law provision
Source: fox news
URL Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201 ... ttle-arrives-at-supreme-court/
Published: Apr 25, 2012
Author: staff
Post Date: 2012-04-25 12:56:07 by calcon
Keywords: None
Views: 110

The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday that it might uphold a key element of Arizona's immigration law, as justices across the board suggested the state has a serious problem on its hands and should have some level of sovereignty to address illegal immigration.

The justices appeared to ready to allow a provision requiring police officers to check the immigration status of people they think are in the U.S. illegally.

The justices strongly suggested Wednesday they are not buying the Obama administration's argument that the state exceeded its authority, with Chief Justice John Roberts at one point saying he doesn't think the federal government even wants to know how many illegal immigrants are in the country.

"You can see it's not selling very well," Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Obama administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

Just like the health care overhaul challenge heard earlier this month, Wednesday's hearing on the immigration law drew passionate surrogates from both sides. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was loudly booed by the law's opponents in front of the courthouse. She said in a statement Wednesday afternoon that "I am filled with optimism -- the kind that comes with knowing that Arizona's cause is just and its course is true."

While the justices addressed the traffic stop provision Wednesday, it was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped draft the law, voiced optimism in Arizona's chances.

"This was a very good day for Arizona in the Supreme Court today," he told Fox News. "The U.S. Justice Department was on the ropes."

But Brent Wilkes, director for the League of United Latin American Citizens, warned that the law would take a "human toll" on Arizona families if allowed to stand.

"This is really a racial profiling bill," he told Fox News.

The hearing Wednesday morning has implications far beyond Arizona's borders, as several states, including Alabama and South Carolina, have followed in Arizona's footsteps to craft their own immigration enforcement measures.

The Obama administration, which opposes those measures, has argued that the country cannot sustain a patchwork of separate immigration laws.

Verrilli, who is arguing on behalf of the government, said in his brief that the Executive Branch has the power to enforce immigration policy.

"For each state, and each locality, to set its own immigration policy in that fashion would wholly subvert Congress' goal: a single, national approach," he wrote.

But Arizona argued that the current system is broken, and that the state is paying an unfair price for that failure.

"Arizona shoulders a disproportionate burden of the national problem of illegal immigration," attorney Paul Clement argued in his brief. He argued that enforcement attention in California and Texas has turned the Arizona border into a funnel for illegal immigrants, with a third of illegal border crossings occurring there.

The attorney described Arizona's law as a response to an "emergency situation" -- with illegal immigrants soaking up millions of state dollars in health care and education, posing safety risks to ranchers and cutting into the state's job market.

Two of the key statutes, which have been blocked and will be at issue in Wednesday's arguments, are provisions to bar illegal immigrants from seeking a job and to require law enforcement to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally in the course of a routine stop.

A ruling from the Supreme Court is likely to come this summer, in the thick of the presidential election year -- it could either bolster what has been a bold move from the Obama administration's Justice Department to intervene in state issues ranging from immigration to voter ID laws, or stop the administration in its tracks and open the floodgates to even more state laws that challenge federal authority.

The immigration case arrives at the high court Wednesday just weeks after the justices heard arguments in the multi-state challenge to the federal health care overhaul.

Democrats on Capitol Hill this week were already scrambling to prepare for the possibility that the high court upholds the immigration law. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced a plan to introduce a bill that would effectively nullify Arizona's law -- though it would stand virtually no chance of passing in the Republican-controlled House.

"Immigration has not and never has been an area where states are able to exercise independent authority," Schumer said Tuesday at a Capitol Hill hearing, where he announced he would introduce the proposal should the Supreme Court "ignore" the "plain and unambiguous statements of congressional intent" and uphold the Arizona law.

But former Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, the author of the law, said: "We have a national crisis, and yet everyone wants to ignore that: the cost, the damage, the crime."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/...reme-court/#ixzz1t4X4lq00

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com