Skip to comments.Even Liberal Justice Sotomayor Shredded The Govt's Arguments Against Arizona's Immigration Law
Posted on 04/25/2012 1:27:54 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Signs it's not going well for this government and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli at the Supreme Court: when a traditionally liberal judge appointed by Barack Obama has no idea of the argument they're trying to make.
Enter Justice Sonia Sotomayor:
"Putting aside your argument that this -- that a systematic cooperation is wrong -- you can see it's not selling very well -- why don't you try to come up with something else?" she said to Verrilli.
"Because I, frankly -- as the chief has said to you, it's not that it's forcing you to change your enforcement priorities. You don't have to take the person into custody. So what's left of your argument?"
Verrilli had a rough time today trying to sell the Supreme Court justices — even the liberal ones — against the Arizona immigration law.
For context, Verrilli opened with a three-pronged opening argument against a controversial provision in SB 1070 that requires law enforcement officials to check the legal status of detained and arrested people with reasonable suspicion. It went like this:
1. Two million Hispanics live in Arizona — 400,000 illegally. Almost immediately, Justice Antonin Scalia cut him off because it "sounds like racial profiling to me." Earlier, Verrilli assured Chief Justice John Roberts that he would not attempt to argue on racial profiling grounds.
2. He moved onto the accountability issues of state officials enforcing federal laws but not being held accountable. No justice seemed to buy that.
3. The new amount of reports from state officials would overburden federal resources.
But that argument drew the skeptical comments from Sotomayor.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Why doesn’t burrax atty just call all the SCOTUS judges ‘RACIST’ and be done with it? That’s how all liberals “win” their arguments when they cannot argue logically.
The regime should’a sent their Great Constitutional Scholar, Hussein to argue b4 SCOTUS today.
This is one of the reasons that I’d just as soon see Obama reelected as Romney.
The court is standing up to Obama. Congress has started standing up to Obama.
Romney will have a free pass from Democrats, RINOS and Establishment Republicans to implement the same agenda as Obama. Obama won’t.
This must REALLY sting Obama and Holder...coming from a Wise Latina and all.
Two words: Executive Order.
Why is it that Obama keeps losing SCOTUS decisions? Is it the incompetency of those representing his cause, or is it that Obama and his cronies continue to oppose the Constitution of America.
Why is it that Obama keeps losing SCOTUS decisions? Is it the incompetency of those representing his cause, or is it that Obama and his cronies continue to oppose the Constitution of America?
That has always been the problem. The GOP only acts conservative when they are a minority.
“He moved onto the accountability issues of state officials enforcing federal laws but not being held accountable”
As if somehow federal officials are held to account more than state officials. Ha, ha!
Oh, wait, I get it, they’re not being held accountable by the feds. Because it’s 1865 and states are racist and can’t govern themselves. They need the coolheaded, disinterested, enlightened overseers in Washington to tell when and how to check someone’s citizenship status. Hint: the answer is never.
I predict the Kenyan will be coming out long about tomorrow with another threat to the justices. He’s too stupid to learn just like his DOJ attorney.
“Why is that Obama ...
He’s not used to hearing the word `No.’ All his life has been:
“That’s a good thing you did, Barry/Barack—that’s a real good thing!”
He reached his level of competence as a communist organizer.
I believe Sotomayor is going to rule against the mandate in obamacare as well.
Just a hunch. I think she is alot more conservative than we think.
Fiscal conservatism is the spoken ideology of whatever party doesn’t control the House of Representatives - where (by in large) they decide where all that sweet sweet money is going.
It was spend spend spend with no end in sight for the Democrats - but as soon as they lost control of the House - suddenly fiscal restraint was the order of the day.
The GOP talks a good game about financial conservatism - but once they have control of the House - ideology takes a back seat to the fun fun fun of spending ALL THAT MONEY!
That would not be surprising to me. I’m reading todays transcript. She appears sane.
From what i have read about her - she is a prety fair judge during her appellate term, particularly on commercial matters.
Wouldnt it be funny if she turned into a conservative jurist over time? LOL = the left would melt.
You mean like the way Gov Romney used his office to equate Sodomy with Marriage?
Be still my heart.