Obama sues Arizona

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

Just when you think the Obama administration disregard for the rule of law couldn't get any worse it sets the bar that much lower.

The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws. It is already illegal under federal law to be in the country illegally, but Arizona is the first state to make it a state crime and add its own punishment and enforcement tactics.

Gosh, in the same way that states pursuing bank robbers usurps the federal laws against bank robbery?

Obama & Co. also seem blissfully unaware that there are dozens of state laws against activities that are illegal at the federal level. Are they going to argue that all of them are invalid?

Obama and holder are giving the Constitution the middle finger and violating the rights of states that are clearly defined in the Constitution as well as ignoring the duties and limitations of the federal government contained in that document.

Do Obama and Holder really think they can pull off something so egregiously anti-American?

I'd love to see counter-suits from states that recognize the federalism defined by the Constitution and which object to the callous disregard for the rule of law being perpetrated by the Obama administration.

It will be amusing to see how many people who claimed that Bush was "shredding the Constitution" stand up and object to a real raping of the rule of law.

So is this the lowest Obama and Holder can go or will we see worse by November?

ETA: court decisions and DOJ analysis. If you read carefully there's an out for Obama to play: declare that immigration laws are not being enforced at the federal level so states cannot enforce them either. It's a move that would satisfy the extremists on his side but pretty much cause a political tsunami against Democrats who continued to support Obama.

Comments

8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VII/1304

Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times
carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate
of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to
him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails
to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of
a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined
not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or
both.


That seems very similar to the AZ law.

Re: 8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

THIS is not the issue of contention... it's the standard upon which they may be questioned that is the problem.

Re: 8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Well, if the law suit i s concerned with profiling. Shouldn't the Federal Law be examined first, since it does not specifically state that a Federal Law enforcement officer can not consider race or color whereas the AZ law specifically guards against that?

A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution

Re: 8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

There is no outward sign for which probable cause can be established for this 'crime'. In the absence of such, other, more superficial characteristics, like race, become substitutes for evidence.

Re: 8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

You are wrong. This lawsuit is not that the law is violating one of the Amendments or that it's profiling anyone, it's only that the law is usurping Federal level law, which it definitely is not.

Re: 8 U.S.C. § 1304 : US Code - Section 1304

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

And the reason it's probably never really been carried out is because there is no outward sign of probable cause with which one can assess whether or not the law has been violated before one is questioned about it.

The same problem which will face the new AZ law.