Posted on 08/29/2011 12:27:09 PM PDT by Second Amendment First
A federal judge temporarily blocked enforcement of Alabama's new law cracking down on illegal immigration, ruling Monday that she needed more time to decide whether the law opposed by the Obama administration, church leaders and immigrant-rights groups is constitutional.
The brief order by U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Blackburn means the law won't take effect as scheduled on Thursday. The ruling was cheered by opponents who have compared the law to old Jim Crow-era statutes against racial integration.
But Blackburn didn't address whether the law is constitutional, and she could still let all or parts of the law take effect later. The judge said she will issue a longer ruling by Sept. 28.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
um... it’s unconstitutional to follow the law???
And he will get them by the millions.
Oh, I think we all know what to expect from her. She wouldn’t have done this without knowing what she’s going to ultimately rule.
Schools and most welfare programs are state functions, the state has every right to decide who gets in.
I don’t think this ruling is biased. There’s a lot for the judge to consider among the many filings, however the article is very biased.
When are we going to get a Governor that has the BALLS to tell the FEDs to GFYS and ignore their ruling?
How long does it take to read the Constitution, look up some words in a dictionary and write a few paragraphs describing how the Founders got it right?
why am I not surprised
The sum result of all of this damnable liberal bullsh*t is that US Citizenship will be utterly meaningless.
This seems like an entirely new power upsurped by the courts. "We don't know if this law is unconstitutional or not; so we will arbitrarily suspend this law for an undefined period of time, until we 'get around' to making a decision".
How about let it stand, and then let it get challenged in a court like EVERY OTHER LAW!!
Because it has a disproportionate impact on Hispanic non-Americans. >:).
I think the Alabama law contains many different provisions. SCOTUS did hand down a good ruling on the older Arizona law which sanctions employers who hire illegals. A lot remains to be ruled on concerning the various state laws addressing illegal immigrants.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/supreme-court-upholds-arizona-immigration-law-.html
We have had it with illegal judges...how about hat? Tar and feathering would not be innapropriate. We need another revolution....sorry it has come to that...but even our founders knew that it may have to happen again.
This was life in pubbie-land also, which is why they lost in 2006 and 2008. The people, by and large, do NOT want illegals in this country. Period!
Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982):
The Court held that A Texas law which denied the benefits of free public education to illegal aliens violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, stating that discrimination on the basis of immigration status did not further a substantial state interest.
A ridiculous decision, obviously, but that's how we got to where we are today. Justice Brennan's footnote #10 gave us birthright citizenship for illegals. It could probably be eliminated by statute.
You know, I’m a stickler for the rule of law as much as anyone. It’s what separates us from being an anarchical society.
Having said that, it’s become obvious that we have a judiciary (on the state and federal level) that is basically saying “We’re gonna legislate from the bench. We know what’s best”.
What would happen to Alabama if they said to the federal judge “You blocked our law. Now try to enforce your block”?
Could the federal govt forseeably send troops in to enforce a judge’s decision - ala Little Rock in 1957?
How DARE Alabama criminalize those who break the law!...
*wait*
Who does Alabama think they are to enforce laws that criminals break?...
*ummmm*
What right does Alabama have to actually arrest law-breakers when they break the law?...
Roll Tide!!!
bookmark-— esp, post 6, 8, 12.
It doesn’t really matter. They file multiple lawsuits to shop for the judge they want. Someone would have done this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.