[Defiant]

The distinction is that the constitution provides that immigration is a federal power. Now, as Rush has noted, that does not mean that states cannot enforce federal law, but the court said today that they cannot.

I am longing for the day when we have a President that decides not to enforce tax laws.

[Star Traveler]

Note that whatever the Supreme Court says is “Unconstitutional” - it means that a state cannot make a “law” in which the US Supreme Court just said it’s Unconstitutional.

What one has to do in that case - is follow the Constitutional and put forth a “Constitutional Amendment” which would then OVERRIDE the US Supreme Court decision. Of course that takes a 2/3 vote of Congress to get the Constitutional Amendment started, and then it takes 3/4 of the states in the US to pass it - and the process usually takes about 7 years (depending on the time length Congress specifies in the Amendment).

HOWEVER, the “heart of the matter” (as Governor Jan Brewer puts it) - was NOT declared Unconstitutional. So, that part is not true.

[jwalsh07]

Yeah, 5 aholes in robes who live on Mt Olympus.

Secession comes to mind but they need a port. Texas doing anything tomorrow? NM maybe gives them a ribbon of land for safe passage? Declare on Mexico and fight their way to the sea?

[Ohioan]

Under Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, the States' action in giving up the war making power to the Federal Government is waived, where a State is actually invaded. What are the hordes who have been coming over the Arizona border illegally, if they are not an invasion?

It is really "crunch" time, if any continuity in the American experience, is to be maintained. A nation is not a geographic entity, but a specific people, with a common identity, a common purpose. The Left in adopting the insane immigration policy of 1965--the Teddy Kennedy initiative--and compounding that by refusing to protect our Southern border for the past twenty years, has gravely imperiled the continuity of America, her heritage & culture. (See Immigration & The American Future.) The argument for preserving what is ours, is not answered by name calling or hissing insult.

William Flax [Continuity, not "Diversity"]

[Boogieman]

I don’t think it would work, since that was essentially what AZ did with some parts of the statute that were struck down. The Feds weren’t enforcing the immigration laws, so they made it a state misdemeanor to hold a job in AZ if you were in the country illegally. The Feds said, no that’s strictly a Federal matter.

[expat2]

It seems to me that the Court may be inviting a suit against the Feds for non-enforcement of an existing Federal law. Surely, selective enforcement of the laws of the country is unconstitutional.