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

Canada, At War For 13 Years, Shocked That ‘A Terrorist’ Attacked Its Soldiers

Introducing Shortwave’s Newest Broadcaster: Global 24 Radio

jwpegler :The Lightweight Liar That Mocks God Claims Jesus Never Said Anyting About Homosexuals (His Pants Are on Fire)

Steyn: One Person Can Change Everything and ‘I Like Ted Cruz’

Hillary: 'Don't Let Anybody Tell You' That 'Businesses Create Jobs'

Vampires of the Animal Kingdom

UN Day: Obama and UN Boss Urge Celebrations, More Power

Nebraska Dem Uses Coma Patient as Prop in Political Ad

Who’s bankrolling secretive liberal group America Votes?

AC/DC drummer Phil Rudd rocks the high-rollers

Republican Barbarians at the Gates

Ancient Roman Nanotechnology Inspires Next-Generation Holograms for Information Storage

Belarus Wants to Criminalize Unemployment

Former NSA Official: Anyone Who 'Justified' Snowden's Leaks Shouldn't Be Allowed A Gov't Job

CIA Apparently 'Impersonated' Senate Staffers To Gain Access To Documents On Shared Drives

Rand Paul just gave one of the most important foreign policy speeches in decades

Holder ‘Exasperated’ Over ‘Selective Leaks’ Of Wilson’s Grand Jury Case

Indiana’s Toll Road Goes Bankrupt

Love Is the Answer to Empire

THANKS, CUOMO, NOW WE HAVE EBOLA

Ebola was October’s Political Surprise…Amnesty will be November’s Reality

Debate crowd loudly laughs at “War Against Women” charge by female Dem challenger (#NY23)

Craig Spencer Tests Positive For Ebola In New York City

Things Fall Apart–America In Crisis

As America's Kids Starve On Government Lunches, Illegals Get Second Helpings And Gitmo's Finest Get Fat

Sources: NYPD Hatchet Attacker May Have Been ISIS Supporter

Retired pope says interreligious dialogue no substitute for mission

Burrito chain urged to drop 'illegal' from name

‘My house is not for sale’: Indiana residents fight city’s home-seizure plan

Where Did Ebola Come From?

Microsoft Co-Founder Paul Allen Bumps Ebola Effort to $100 Million

Does This Look Like a President That Can Save You From Ebola?

Obama claims executive privilege over 15,000 Fast and Furious docs

Oct. 24 & 25: Second Round of National Protests Against Illegal Immigration and Amnesty

Report: At least seven black witnesses have corroborated Darren Wilson’s testimony before the Ferguson grand jury

I've been informed some banned people want to post Plus I corrected the Status of Fred Mertz

Will Michelle Obama go into politics next?

Dan DiMicco's solution for what ails U.S. economy? Manufacturing

Federale In Japan: It Works—And It Could Work In The U.S. Too

850 voters in NYC are officially 164 years old

Revealed Autopsy Destroys 'Gentle Giant' Michael Brown 'Hands Up, Don't Shoot' Story

Soldier, 24, shot dead by Muslim convert Michael Zehaf-Bibeau who opened fire on Canadian Parliament

INELIGIBLE DACA BENEFICIARIES DISCOVERED ON NC VOTING ROLLS

Multiple shooters reported in Canada attack By Ashley Fantz and Josh Levs, CNN

Armed Huey P. Newton Gun Activists and Black Panthers Marched Through Dallas Yesterday

So sez secular LP poster Jwpegler: "Fund[ies] who run around screaming and hollering about gays are more like Old Testament Jews than New Testament Christians"

How the Obama administration handles scandals and scares

Obama Has Cut a Deal with African Leaders to Bring Ebola Patients into US

A Cultural Marxist Tries To Deconstruct Japan. Guess What, He’s American

Ebola Czar Says Population Growth Is Top Issue Facing the World


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: 99

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