Arizona Immigration Ruling~Direct Assault on State Sovereignty

KRISANNEHALL.COM ^ | June 26, 2012 | KrisAnne Hall

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Never has a ruling by the Supreme Court been more aptly titled as an “Opinion,” because that is exactly what Justice Kennedy and his cohorts have delivered in Arizona v. United States. It is nothing more than an open display of judicial activism. The majority opinion is not a legal explanation on the Constitutionality of Arizona’s laws, but is an ideological dissertation on this current administration’s view of immigration.

Not only is this ruling devoid of any appeal to the Constitution, it is very dangerous. It is an aberration of fundamental Constitutional principles and a brazen assault on state sovereignty! Chiefly, Kennedy takes the Supremacy clause of the Constitution, which declares that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and translates that principle into the supremacy of the Federal government over the states. There couldn’t be anything more contrary to our founders’ intent. Let me repeat: this opinion is a monumental assault on the sovereignty of the states.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Excellent analysis by a lady who knows what she is talking about.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Fort Sumter.

[Forrestfire]

I guess there are a shi+ pot full of federal laws tht state and local gubmints will have to stop enforcing, Bank Robbery and drug enforcement come to mind, and maybe kidnapping and .......

[Terry Mross]

Isn’t it fascinating how Kennedy can say with a straight face that it’s not a crime for a “removable immigrant” to stay here. What he’s saying is there is no law that can be used to deport anyone who is here illegally.

[RitaOK]

We are gone and regardless which of these two severe socialist twins are elected, we are gone.

No patriot who revered the Constitution would ever even think about doing, in this country, what Romney did in the state of Massachusetts, turning the American experiment into an incubator for a foreign policy that a Marxist would favor, so highly, as to take Romney’s work there national, and to the letter.

It is inconceivable that Romney was or is a Republican or a patriot. While he must have had plenty to say in MA, enough to clean out hard drives in the office of the governor, but now you can’t GET him to speak on policy or issues, but in the broadest of terms, thickly vague, platitudes and stuttering soundbites.

There is simply no there, there. No firey defense, no offense on religious liberty, the constitutional crisis at hand on illegal immigration, even on fiscal policy, and Schiffer on Face the Nation couldn’t get Myth to say he would repeal healthcare!

This guy Romney may have a plan or two, but he has to be elected first don’t you know, before to find out what’s in him. Been there.

[exnavy]

The founders made it crystal clear, we should never sacrifice a moment of liberty for any security or monetary gain.

To dems and rinos alike we say, may the chains of your masters rest lightly on you.

And be it known that we patriots do not consider any communist, no matter your place of birth, to be our countryman.

[khelus]

One need only read Justice Scalia’s dissent to discover the correct interpretation.

“ The most important point is that, as we have discussed, Arizona is entitled to have “its own immigration policy”—including a more rigorous enforcement policy—so long as that does not conflict with federal law. Today’s opinion, approving virtually all of the Ninth Circuit’s injunction against enforcement of the four challenged provisions of Arizona’s law, deprives States of what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there. Neither the Constitution itself nor even any law passed by Congress supports this result. I dissent.”

Thanks for the post.

For those who are interested, you can find Scalia's dissent here

[E. Pluribus Unum]

I expected Kennedy to side with the Alinskyites, but I never expected Roberts to do so.