Obama tries to stop AZ immigration law
Obama admin asks Supreme Court to stop AZ from enforcing illegal alien law
By Pete Yost May 29, 2010 4:00 AM
*
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration on Friday urged the Supreme Court to prevent Arizona from enforcing a law that punishes businesses that employ illegal immigrants, arguing that federal immigration law trumps state efforts.
The administration's views, contained in a new filing at the high court, are similar to concerns President Barack Obama has expressed about a new Arizona law that cracks down on illegal immigrants.
When it takes effect July 29, the new law will require police enforcing any other law to examine immigration status if there is reasonable suspicion a person is in the country illegally.
Obama and other administration officials have illegal immigration is an issue that must have a national solution rather than being addressed on a piecemeal basis by the states. The Obama administration is contemplating a court challenge to the new law. Justice Department officials met face-to-face with Attorney General Terry Goddard and aides to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer to elicit information from state officials regarding the Obama administration's concerns about the new law.
In asking the Supreme Court to take the employer sanctions case, the Obama administration said federal immigration law expressly pre-empts any state law imposing sanctions on employers hiring illegal immigrants. The administration added that if Arizona businesses knowingly use illegal immigrants, the businesses can have any of their state licenses suspended or revoked.
Lower courts have said that the Arizona law is not pre-empted by the federal law. That should be reversed, acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal said in the Supreme Court filing.
The Arizona law disrupts "a careful balance that Congress struck nearly 25 years ago between two interests of the highest importance: ensuring that employers do not undermine enforcement of immigration laws by hiring unauthorized workers, while also ensuring that employers not discriminate against racial and ethnic minorities legally in the country," Katyal wrote.
Phoenix attorney Julie Pace, representing the trade associations that are challenging the Arizona law, called the Obama administration's position "good news that the federal government has gone on record supporting the legal challenge to the constitutionality" of the Arizona law.
Read more: http://www.gopusa.com/news/2010/05/obama-admin-asks-supreme-court-to-stop-az-from-enforcing-illegal-alien-law.php#ixzz0pQIzcrAh
*
PAT BUCHANAN ON OBAMA’S HISPANDERING FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES:
What is the response of Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully executed?
He is siding with the law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.
*
TOWNHALL.com
Whose Country Is This?
Pat Buchanan
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
With the support of 70 percent of its citizens, Arizona has ordered sheriffs and police to secure the border and remove illegal aliens, half a million of whom now reside there.
Arizona acted because the U.S. government has abdicated its constitutional duty to protect the states from invasion and refuses to enforce America's immigration laws.
"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," said Gov. Jan Brewer. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created an unacceptable situation."
We have a crisis in Arizona because we have a failed state in Washington.
What is the response of Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully executed?
He is siding with the law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.
He has denounced Arizona as "misguided." He has called on the Justice Department to ensure that Arizona's sheriffs and police do not violate anyone's civil rights. But he has said nothing about the rights of the people of Arizona who must deal with the costs of having hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers in their midst.
How's that for Andrew Jackson-style leadership?
Obama has done everything but his duty to enforce the law.
Undeniably, making it a state as well as a federal crime to be in this country illegally, and requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they have a "reasonable suspicion" is here illegally, is tough and burdensome. But what choice did Arizona have?
The state has a fiscal crisis caused in part by the burden of providing schooling and social welfare for illegals and their families, who consume far more in services than they pay in taxes and who continue to pour in. Even John McCain is now calling for 3,000 troops on the border.
Police officers and a prominent rancher have been murdered. There have been kidnappings believed to be tied to the Mexican drug cartels. There are nightly high-speed chases through the barrios where innocent people are constantly at risk.
If Arizona does not get control of the border and stop the invasion, U.S. citizens will stop coming to Arizona and will begin to depart, as they are already fleeing California.
A country that cannot control its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
What we are talking about here is the Balkanization and breakup of a nation into ethnic enclaves. A country that cannot control its borders isn't really a country anymore, Ronald Reagan reminded us.
The tasks that Arizonans are themselves undertaking are ones that belong by right, the Constitution and federal law to the Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Homeland Security.
Arizona has been compelled to assume the feds' role because the feds won't do their job. And for that dereliction of duty the buck stops on the desk of the president of the United States.
Why is Obama paralyzed? Why does he not enforce the law, even if he dislikes it, by punishing the businessmen who hire illegals and by sending the 12 million to 20 million illegals back home? President Eisenhower did it. Why won't he?
*
OBAMA THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT SELLING OUT HIS OWN COUNTRY FOR THE ILLEGALS’ VOTES!
*
Because he is politically correct. Because he owes a big debt to the Hispanic lobby that helped deliver two-thirds of that vote in 2008. Though most citizens of Hispanic descent in Arizona want the border protected and the laws enforced, the Hispanic lobby demands that the law be changed.
Fair enough. But the nation rose up as one to reject the "path-to-citizenship" -- i.e., amnesty -- that the 2007 plan of George W. Bush, McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama envisioned.
Al Sharpton threatens to go to Phoenix and march in the streets against the new Arizona law. Let him go.
JOBS? NO LEGAL NEED APPLY HERE!
Let us see how many African-Americans, who are today frozen out of the 8 million jobs held by illegal aliens that might otherwise go to them or their children, will march to defend an invasion for which they are themselves paying the heaviest price.
Last year, while Americans were losing a net of 5 million jobs, the U.S. government -- Bush and Obama both -- issued 1,131,000 green cards to legal immigrants to come and take the jobs that did open up, a flood of immigrants equaled in only four other years in our history.
What are we doing to our own people?
Whose country is this, anyway?
America today has an establishment that, because it does not like the immigration laws, countenances and condones wholesale violation of those laws.
Nevertheless, under those laws, the U.S. government is obligated to deport illegal aliens and punish businesses that knowingly hire them.
This is not an option. It is an obligation.
Can anyone say Barack Obama is meeting that obligation?
*
THE SCARY REALITY OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY AT WORK!
Arizona Leads the Way Against Illegal Immigration
Posted by Jacob Laksin on Apr 27th, 2010 and filed under FrontPage.
Jacob Laksin is managing editor of Frontpage Magazine. He is co-author, with David Horowitz, of One-Party Classroom: How Radical Professors at America's Top Colleges Indoctrinate Students and Undermine Our Democracy. His work has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Philadelphia Inquirer, The Weekly Standard, City Journal, Policy Review, as well as other publications. Email him at jlaksin@gmail.com.
If you’ve been following the news from Arizona in recent days, you’ve probably heard that the state’s Republican governor, Jan Brewer, has just signed into law a “racist” bill that will punish Hispanics, stamp out civil rights, create a police state – and trample on the Constitution for good measure. You also may have heard that the Arizona law will “undermine basic notions of fairness,” at least according to President Obama, who has called the law “misguided” and ordered the Justice Department to find some way to challenge its standing.
Apocalyptic rhetoric notwithstanding, the Arizona law is not at all controversial in substance. All it does is deputize state police to determine whether people are in the country legally and to question them if there is reasonable suspicion that they’re not. Of course, that function should properly be handled by the federal government. But because the government has made so little effort to enforce immigration laws, border states that bear the brunt of illegal immigration – an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants call Arizona home – have been forced to take action on their own terms.
The concept behind the immigration law is straightforward: If you enforce laws against illegal immigration, you will have less of it. That was also the idea behind Arizona’s Legal Arizona Workers Act, which required the state’s employers to verify the immigration status of new hires using the federal government’s E-Verify program. Businesses eager to avoid the burdens of verification and pro-illegal immigration groups also opposed that measure, filing suit to prevent its passage, but emerging evidence seems to suggest that it had the desired effect: Since being implemented in January 2008, the LAWA has resulted in a substantial decrease of illegal immigration.
The new law seeks to continue that progress. It does so mostly by making state crimes what are already federal crimes. For instance, the Arizona law makes it a crime to be in the country illegally – in other words, it enforces the national law. The Arizona law also requires police to question people about their immigration status if they have reasonable cause to suspect that they’re illegal immigrants. To prevent abuse or racial discrimination, the law also includes provisions banning racial profiling, and the measure itself has nothing to do with race or ethnicity, as the bill’s foes claim. Still, given that the majority of the state’s illegal immigrants are from neighboring Mexico, it is inevitable that the majority of those targeted by the law will be Hispanic. That says more about the demographics of illegal immigration than the allegedly discriminatory agenda of Arizona authorities.
Concerns about the abuse of civil liberties are similarly overblown. The Arizona law will require anyone arrested for a crime to have their immigration status established before their release. In theory, this should already be the law of the land; but so-called “sanctuary city” laws enacted by cities and municipalities across the country have prevented police from enforcing immigration laws. Such laws certainly benefit felons who escape deportation. How they profit the country at large is less apparent. The Arizona law also requires residents to carry ID or immigration registration documents at all times. That too is reasonable. A valid ID is already required to qualify for government and public assistance programs available to citizens and requiring one form of valid ID – whether a drivers license a government-issue ID — hardly marks the onset of Nazi Germany. Indeed, no less than President Obama has previously expressed support for a national ID card.
While some have criticized Arizona for taking the initiative against illegal immigration, it’s hard to find fault with the state’s sense of urgency. Last month’s murder of Arizona cattle rancher Rob Krentz was just example of the crime problem that unchecked illegal immigration has helped create and the problems its poses for American justice. Although Kentz was known for providing illegals with food and water, police found tracks at the murder scene leading to the Mexican border. They made no arrests in the case. In that climate of lawlessness, the state cannot be blamed for passing a law that may help offer a solution. Moreover, with the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats threatening to take up immigration reform – that is, amnesty for the 11-million plus illegal immigrants in this country unmatched by serious enforcement measures going forward – states like Arizona are left with a choice of doing something to combat the problem or leaving it to the federal government to make it worse.
LA RAZA, “THE RACE” – THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of AMERICA AT WORK:
If there is an ugly side revealed by the Arizona law, it is in the extremism of pro-illegal immigration groups. On Monday, opponents of the Arizona law used refried beans to smear swastikas on the Arizona state Capitol. Another champion of illegal immigration, Mexican President Felipe Calderon, made the not-so-veiled threat that Mexican trade and political relations with Arizona would suffer if it cracked down on illegals.
Defying these opponents and braving slander in much of the press coverage, Arizona has taken the lead in enforcing the country’s immigration laws and protecting the rights and interests of its citizens. For the Left, the new law makes Arizona a model of an “American-style police state.” For those serious about border security
No comments:
Post a Comment