Feds Sue AZ, SB1070 Stopped
The Justice Department is scheduled to file suit in federal court over AZ's SB1070 "Show Me Your Papers" law later today. The suit has been expected for some time. Implementation of SB1070 will also likely be prevented as the case meanders it's way through the legal system. Look for this misguided and ineffective law to finally show up at the Supreme Court in a few years, where legal observers predict it will be promptly tossed.
Please return to your tea parties, minutemen gathering, or John Birch Society meetings, nothing more to see here.
UPDATE: AZ. Congressman Raul Grijalva releases statement.
UPDATE: The entire Dept of Justice complaint.
UPDATE: Former Sunland-Tujunga resident, AZ Governor Jan Brewer, issues her statement.
Labels: SB1070
Posted by Unknown @ 7/06/2010 09:34:00 AM
29 Comments:
Joe this is already FEDERAL LAW. The lawyers and professors did their homework before Gov. Brewer had the guts to enact it. When 70% of America supports Arizona and SB1070 that is sending a powerful message. OUr CAlif. immigration law is so much harsher then Arizona yet we fail to enforce. All Arizona is doing is ENFORCING A LAW THAT IS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. DOJ is going to sue themselves for their own laws. Go Figure!!!
9:59,
One word, "Preemption", hence it being tossed. This is long standing
SCOTUS precedent.
How unfortunate.
We should treat immigrants like Mexico does:
At present, Article 67 of Mexico’s Population Law says, “Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal … are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country, before attending to any issues.”
That would simplify things.
Democrats like Mailander here will find much shit all over their face when their Party gets the biggest creaming of all time in November.
What does Mailander have to do with this?
I only approved the comment because I needed a laugh at how idiotic our furry poster is.
have a fun day!
Interesting point about Mexico's law. Sounds like a good policy.
This guy is wearing sunglasses and a cowboy hat and hates brown people.
Is that Phil Jennerjahn?
Joe B is intellectually dishonest once again.
SB1070 has not been stopped yet.
Joe can continue to lie and hate.
1:19,
For all intent and purposes the law is toast. I'm not the one hating or lying either, that honor goes to Gov Brewer and FAIR.
Funny--every legal observer I've seen weigh in says the law is perfectly constitutional, hence Obama's pussyfooting around the issue for months. This lawsuit is pure Democrat Hail Mary politics going into November and Eric Holder--quite possibly the stupidest Attorney General ever--is Obama's stooge. A few years from now 1070 will be upheld as constitutional, but Obama will already be voted out of office so he'll mostly escape embarrassment.
The legal observers on Fox don't count.
I heard the announcement of this--a special announcement, it was--between minute seven and eight of the Uruguay v. Holland football match on Univision. That dramatico 45-second explanation of the DoJ's actions in the middle of a world cup semifinal should cost eMeg about $10 million more to buy the Governor's office alone.
"Democrats like Mailander here" did make me laugh I have to admit, though.
More surrender policies from Joe B and his idol President Zero.
Yuck.
HEY PHIL,
WHAT TIME IS IT?
TIME TO RUN ANOTHER PATHETIC CAMPAIGN THAT WILL ONLY GET YOU LAST PLACE!
OH, AND "YUCK?" WHAT GRADE ARE YOU IN? "YUCK?"
For what it's worth, and for the record -- we have a record, right? -- I think parts of the law are constitutional, and parts are not.
The parts that merely require state lawe enforcement agents to enforce federal law are constitutional.
The parts that create new punishments based on the same conduct prohibited by federal law, however, will probably be found unconstitutional (e.g., for "trespass" by being in the state illegally).
I think the courts will find that Congress intended to preempt the field when it comes to prescribing penalties for entering and remaining in the country illegally, but did not intend to prevent state and local law enforcement authorities from enforcing federal laws.
"Lawe" should have been "law." Oopsie.
Phil's comment makes him semi-known, but totally stupid.
Fortunately he is always going to be a last place loser when it comes to getting anything done on the recall or a campaign.
TOO BAD PHIL WASN'T A STAND-UP GUY TO JAMES ANDION. HE COULD HAVE GOTTEN A JOB WITH HIS CAMPAIGN AND BEEN OFF TO A BETTER CAREER.
THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR BEING A JUDAS, PHIL!
Dear Phil,
If you can prove to Mayor Sam's readers that you have at least 2,400 signatures, a mere 1% of what you needed, I will become a fan of yours.
Can you do this?
Prove to us what you accomplished and I will personally sing your praises.
JOE B, CALIFORNIA BILLIONAIRES, THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE MONEY, PAY TAXES AND CREATE JOBS, ARE DONATING TO WHITMAN, AND THEY'RE ALL FROM THEIR TRADITIONAL PERCHES ON THE LEFT!
JERRY BROWN IS TOAST, JUST LIKE YOU SAID THE ARIZONA LAW IS.
FROM LATIMES:
They include: Jerry Yang, the founder of Yahoo! Inc.; Eli Broad, the Los Angeles philanthropist; A. Jerrold Perenchio, the former head of Univision; Thomas Siebel, the founder of Siebel Systems; and William Barron Hilton, the hotel and casino magnate.
Each gave the legal maximum for the general election: $25,900.
Dozens of others gave as well, including Gene Sykes, a managing director at Goldman Sachs, the controversial Wall Street firm where Whitman once served on the board of directors.
Phil,
The only person with a surrender policy is you, now that you have given up on the recall campaign.
Why has Arizona become such an embarrassment to the United States?
Mexico's law is...
Who gives a sh*t? Since when do we take an example from Mexico? Because they are great at maintaining law and order, right?
The Arizona law resembles Mexico's law? Sounds like a good reason to scrap it.
What's next? We'll be taking our legal precedents from the soviet union?
http://article.nationalreview.com/437656/defending-arizona/kris-w-kobach?page=1
Read the law by one of the co authors. Every talk show radio yesterday was saying DOJ will not win on this. "Preemption" as Joe stated is a none issue in this law. I agree with many who say cities that choose to be santuary for illegals like LA, Maywood, Santa Ana, etc. should be sued for not enforcing immigration laws
ALL FOR JAN BREWSTER. IMMIGRATION TREATENS THE SOVEIGHTY OF THIS COUNTRY. SEE WWW.PRESS1FORENGLISH.COM IT OUTLINES MANY OF THE PROBLEMS FACING THIS COUNTRY. WE MUST END SANTUARY CITIES AND MAKE TRUE CITIZENSHIP MEAN SOMETHING UNTIL THEN WE ARE ALL AMERICAN FOOLS FOR THE TAKING. I DON'T BLAME THE MEXICANS FOR TAKING ADVANTAGE OF MANY STUPID AND DUPED AMERICANS AND THIS GOVERNMENT WE DESERVE IT FOR BEING SO GUILLABLE.
Even those who think Arizona has a right to try to fill in gaps in the feds' stopping illegal immigration and the crime resulting from it like cops, say it's HOW it's written that is so bad. Cops will be sued if they do NOT enforce what some feel is "reasonable suspicion" or if they DO enforce it, sued either way.
"Reasonable suspicion" of being illegal can't include race alone but it does include - on the training video the state put out for law enforcement - things like speaking English very poorly or not at all combined with certain clothing or other factors.
Clear as mud. Many civil rights attorneys are disappointed they won't be able to get rich yet.
Suing the working people of Arizona who will pay, just like we in L A have AGAIN for May Day Melee, some $15 million so far with the Fox 11 camera operator just being awarded $1.7. (Funny, I don't recall reports of anyone being seriously injured.) Her lawyer said they were willing to settle for $250,000 but Trutanich insisted on taking it to a jury.
Like with the $2.5 2 firefighter LAFD captains were just awarded for reverse discrimination in the Tennie Pierce case. Who pays?
SB1070 Is another example of the rise in racism and xenophobes in AmeriKKKa.
Look to Mexico for true racism. That's their specialty. They have racism against their poor, countries south of their border and also their Indians. They are the last people to be talking about racism in the USA.
Besides stepping on the toes on the Federal Aliens and Seditions Acts, I wonder if Arizona's SB1070 might be also infringing upon interstate commerce?
I think both sides of this debate can agree that the issue of undocumented immigrations are largely economic. Therefore, as SB1070 begins to affect the quantity of available skilled labor from the south that almost ALL of the states are beginning to depend on, I wonder how long it could be before some states start to sue Arizona.
Two of the four corner states do not have ready access to the US-Mexican border and so could be the first amongst the States to feel a labor crunch. Ever wonder how that Vegas Hotel room is always spotless? Or how Colorado packs its beef?
If YOU needed to re-tile your kitchen would you choose a meth-addict or a crackhead or Hose A and Hose B from the local Home Depot parking lot? Of course you would go with Hose A and Hose B. It is simple economics. They do quality work at reasonable prices.
Just out of curiosity, how many of you immediately thought "meth-addict=white" and "crackhead=black"? Don't lie. You know you did.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home