Where is the interview with Jan Brewer? I just want to see her face for a moment. Will she apologize to the President for her rudeness on the tarmac?
There are also civil liberties groups who are suing against this ruling. This one isn’t over–not by a long shot.
Were there winners and losers? Probably everyone is going to claim a piece of this pie.
Will this affect the presidential race? Will it energize Latinos?
Brewer has spoken, claiming victory and saying nothing in her released statement that I would bet money she didn’t wrote herself.
Not sure if the one provision is probably cause or not. Most of the reporters probably can’t tell the difference.
We here in PWC have more highly honed skills on such matters.
Why is Mitt romney headed to AZ? I would just leave it lone if I were Romney.
Scalia was his usual piggy self and directed part of his argument at the President. So much for not being political or not being reflective of political pressure.
I can’t believe these people are appointed for life.
To answer that age old question: “But how do you know they’re illegal?”
Answer: Simply ask for proper ID, it’s perfectly LEGAL!
Do you carry ID that would tell anyone you were an A merican citizen? I sure don’t.
I dont think I have the right to go up to someone and ask to see their ID.
I think it is more worrisome that juveniles can’t receive life sentences.
Some of those 16, 17 year olds are ruthless killers who deserve to never see the light of day.
I wonder who is boo hooing over them because they are children. Malvo comes to mind.
That’s an easy answer. An AMERICAN will tell a police officer to pound sand. A “person that lacks the legal documentation and authority to reside in the United States and does so in an illegal way” would probably be very nervous at the question and lie or otherwise show that he’s not legally present.
Most Americans would not tell an officer to pound sand. Most of us have been raised to respect the police. Even if you don’t, you pretend to.
I agree…Scalia is a partisan hack.
After arresting any “person that lacks the legal documentation and authority to reside in the United States and does so in an illegal way” and having to release that person because the Federales refuse to enforce their own laws I would hope that Arizona were to keep, maintain and release a list weekly of the persons and addresses to have been caught and released.
I want the people of Arizona or any other state to see how many people are caught and released because the Federales refuse to follow their own laws.
Marin, I see what you are saying now. You cannot track those picked up. We cannot do it here. It has always been that way.
I am not so sure how I feel about that.
Doesn’t the county have a law suit over this very issue at the moment? What ever happened to that?
Twinad, you hit the nail on the head. I was speechless when I heard what he had said. His buddy Clarence is a little less mouthy but just as bad.
Marin, I have no idea what you just said.
That part that was upheld is still in an iffy state as I understand it from TV tonight.
I think it is iffy because the Supreme Court left open the possibility of a future suit if the way it is implemented is improper (profiling). I don’t think it said that they didn’t decide the issue about constitutionality, just its application may be subject to further scrutiny. But I might be wrong.
I hope Arizona keeps the personal information on file of every illegal alien that is released.
And WHEN one of them breaks the law, have the victims or victim’s family, sue the federal government for negligence since it can be proven that the federal government failed to pick that person up.
Cargo, you seem to forget, but see quote below:
Some on the right were taken aback to see Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., an iconic figure to many conservatives, side with the court’s liberals to reject several key provisions in the law and even declare that as a “general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States.”
It is NOT a crime to be in the United States illegally. It is a civil offense.
Ok. That doesn’t mean that the state cannot keep track of whom it did find to be here illegally. Just keep the name on a list. When that name comes up in any criminal trial…you can point to it and state…Oops…the feds could have prevented that.
Since it is a civil offense, what is the penalty for that civil offense? For it to be an offense, there must be civil penalties.
Being released is a penalty? Being allowed to continued to be here illegally is a penalty? In what way is this NOT an amnesty?
@Cargo, part of the problem with involving local and state police is that they are pulled from doing the other duties for which they are hired.
I don’t have a problem with them asking for documentation on those who hhave been arrested. I do have a problem with pulling someone over because he “looks” illegal.
Jan Brewer said the ruling was a victory. Hope we have more victories like that, bwahaha!
@Moon-howler
They can only ask for documentation from those already detained on other causes. So, its not pulling them from other duties.
I echo what Cargo said in that maintaining a list at the State level will show how many “person(s) that lacks the legal documentation and authority to reside in the United States and does so in an illegal way” are being stopped, detained and let go by the Federales.
Also the centerpiece of the AZ legislation not being struck down (yet) allows for any future Presidents to begin deportations upon swearing in as Obama has not accomplished his aims through the legislature but by fiat. Fiat goes away if a President changes………
So, this isn’t the hollow victory that y’all think it is.
I see this almost like Korematsu v. United States where internment camps were declared constitutional. Sure Obama or a President since that decision has not used them but it doesn’t say he can’t…………
Scalia is a partisan … as is Ginsburg. The whole institution has devolved into a bad joke, really.
ALL judges are partisan. They are human. They all have different interpretations of the Constitution. “Partisan” is meaningless in this case.
These judges are no more or less political than any other judges that we’ve had.
Apparently the Chief Justice is able to remain impartial and act as a judge, not a partisan hack.
@TWINAD
So, can I quote you if he overturns ACR tomorrow? And he also was instrument in the Citizens United Case. How about then?
They are all partisan in the meaning that they all have political beliefs and interpret the Constitution. Partisan does not equate to Hack.
Yes, you sure can.
I just found out that MOST of this program stood. And all of it stands based upon civil rights. It was overturned on the SUPREMACY clause.
Interesting.
http://www.redstate.com/californiasam/2012/06/25/lets-not-forget-about-the-parts-of-sb-1070-that-already-went-into-effect/
What program?
Arizona’s program sb 1070. There were more than 4 provisions. Its just that only 4 were being judged. I didn’t know that.
excerpt:
Only 4 parts of the law were enjoined. The rest was left standing, and because it DID have a severability clause, the rest of the law remains untouched. There’s a great analysis of the enjoined sections and, as Governor Brewer pointed out, the law is only a few pages long and is easy to read.
Here are the sections that were already implemented:
Sanctuary cities or neighborhoods will no longer be tolerated.
Citizens can sue sanctuary cities and fines will be imposed on cities which do not comply with the law.
Unauthorized aliens to be turned over to ICE immediately upon release from prison for another offense.
Immigration status can be shared within the AZ government to determine eligibility for state benefits.
Smuggling human beings is a felony in Arizona.
Drivers cannot block the roadway to hire dayworkers.
Dayworkers cannot enter cars that are blocking roadways.
It is against AZ law to transport, harbor or encourage unauthorized aliens.
An employer may not hire an unauthorized alien, nor knowingly hire a contractor who does and may lose their business license(s) if they do.
@Cargo, yea the rest of left alone but the rest of it didn’t try to usurp federal powers as they relate to immigration which was the issue.
They are going to be sorry about that citizens may sue clause. Talk about unintended consequences….. how many hits can a city take?
What happens if you transport an illegal alien? Someone should strike that one down. What if a citizen sues a rescue wagon for transporting a hurt illegal alien to the hospital?
That could get costly.
Unintended consequences for sure. In Arizona I would be arrested for driving (transporting) my husband of almost 11 years somewhere. Perfect.