U.S. Supreme Court is Set to Rule on Arizona’s Tough New Illegal Immigration Law, SB 1070
By Scott Rohter, June 2012
Based on the oral arguments, and the type of questions that were raised by the Supreme Court Justices, especially from the Court’s first and only Hispanic Justice, Sonia Sotomayor who is also the newest member of the Court, the United States Supreme Court seems un-likely to strike down Arizona’s tough new illegal immigration law, SB 1070. “Why don’t you try to come up with something else?” is just one example of Justice Sotomayor’s questions that she addressed to Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, who seemed like he was having a very hard time defending the Obama Administration's position.
The Federal Government wants the Supreme Court to strike down all or part of the tough Arizona law, especially the part that requires Arizona law enforcement officials to determine the immigration status of anyone they detain, if they have reason to believe that the person they are detaining is here illegally. As far as the other issues that are dealt with by the new Arizona law, such as making it a separate crime for illegal aliens to work while they are in the country, or failing to register with the proper federal authorities, it is harder to tell just how the Supreme Court will decide. If the entire law is upheld, or if any part of it is upheld, pro illegal immigration groups seem certain to appeal the decision until all their legal remedies are utterly exhausted, including the flimsy argument that the Arizona law discriminates based upon race. Hopefully that argument won’t go over very well with Justice Sotomayor either.
Chief Justice John Roberts framed the Constitutional debate this way. He said that the government’s legal challenge to SB 1070 is an argument over the allocation of State and Federal powers. In other words it is a lot of legal wrangling about a dispute over jurisdiction. To put it simply, it is a turf war. If the Arizona law is substantially upheld, it will be viewed by most authorities as a serious setback for the Obama administration, and for his chances of winning re-election in November. Along with the near certain defeat of his signature piece of legislation, The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, this could signal his much anticipated political demise.
Attorney Paul Clement, representing Arizona in this case, argued that Arizona was merely using existing Federal Law to compliment Arizona laws. In other words, Arizona merely adopted existing Federal standards. On the other hand, Donald Verrilli, arguing for the Obama Administration said that the new Arizona law was essentially in conflict with existing Federal standards. Well, if that is indeed the case, then it is only because the Feds are not enforcing their own standards! They are not complying with their own Laws. Under our Constitution the job of the executive branch of government is to enforce the Law, regardless!
Perhaps the Obama Administration should be tried for treason, or for malfeasance, or maybe the President should be taken out and tried for dereliction of duty, or for being an accessory to a crime, or for breaking his oath of office…
“The Constitution vests sole authority over immigration to the Federal government,” Verrilli said… But what if the Federal government isn’t doing its job? What if it refuses to exercise its authority? Are we just supposed to sit around and wait for our country to fall apart, or fall into chaos because the Federal government won’t do its job? Arizona stepped up to protect its own citizens, and to fill the gap. They showed the right stuff, the stuff that America is made of. They accepted responsibility for something that was wrong in their State and they fixed it. What they got for their patriotism, and for doing their civic duty was a Federal Lawsuit. Shame on the Obama Administration for prosecuting them!
Donald Verrilli claims that the new Arizona law represents a direct threat to the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. The Supremacy Clause essentially says that Federal Law trumps State laws. It does not say however that the current Administration's Policy of non-enforcement trumps State laws, or that Barack Obama’s own personal preferences trump State laws. It says that Federal Law trumps State laws. If Barack Obama is not enforcing existing Federal Laws, then he either needs to be prosecuted and removed from office, or the Laws need to be changed.
No parts of Arizona’s tough new immigration law are in conflict with existing Federal Law. They are only in conflict with President Obama’s lax border enforcement policy. President Obama is not above the Law! His sworn duty is to uphold the Law. He is not exercising his obligation to uphold the Law, but even worse than that, he is prosecuting anyone else that does! Herein lies the crux of the whole problem. President Obama has no respect for the Law and the Constitution. President Obama refuses to do his job. The solution is not to sue the State of Arizona. The solution is to indict and try President Obama, and to remove him from office. Hopefully at least some of that will be accomplished in November.
President Obama must enforce existing Federal Immigration Laws whether he likes them or not. That is the job that he signed up to do. This is not a monarchy! The same thing is also true for the Defense of Marriage Act which his Administration also refuses to enforce. Enforcing the Law is the job of the President of the United States of America. That is the oath that he swore to uphold. U.S. Constitution Article 2, Section 1. If he won’t do his job, then he needs to be removed from office. There is no better time than November.
"A journalist has no better friend than the truth." - Scott Rohter
Select Related Articles
Colonizing, 21st Century Style - Illegal Immigration from Mexico
Illegal Immigration and Legal Immigration
Victims of Success-Who is to Blame for America’s Downfall?
The Dream Act: A Real Nightmare
Immigration - Illegal and Legal - Audio
An Open Border