Posted on 04/25/2012 1:35:24 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Supreme Court signaled Wednesday that it might uphold a key element of Arizona's immigration law, as justices across the board suggested the state has a serious problem on its hands and should have some level of sovereignty to address illegal immigration.
The justices appeared ready to allow a provision requiring police officers to check the immigration status of people they think are in the U.S. illegally.
The justices strongly suggested Wednesday they are not buying the Obama administration's argument that the state exceeded its authority, with Chief Justice John Roberts at one point saying he doesn't think the federal government even wants to know how many illegal immigrants are in the country.
"You can see it's not selling very well," Justice Sonia Sotomayor told Obama administration Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.
Just like the health care overhaul challenge heard earlier this month, Wednesday's hearing on the immigration law drew passionate surrogates from both sides. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer was loudly booed by the law's opponents in front of the courthouse. She said in a statement Wednesday afternoon that "I am filled with optimism -- the kind that comes with knowing that Arizona's cause is just and its course is true."
While the justices addressed the traffic stop provision Wednesday, it was unclear what the court would do with other aspects of the law that have been put on hold by lower federal courts.
Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped draft the law, voiced optimism in Arizona's chances. "This was a very good day for Arizona in the Supreme Court today," he told Fox News. "The U.S. Justice Department was on the ropes."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Another policy failure from an administration full of people who each consider themselves to be the smartest people in the room. These people are too smart by half and in their own conceit they have become morons.
Wow. Surprised by Sotomayor’s comments. It’d be quite the shock to see Sotomayor vote to uphold (although I still think it’s unlikely). The left would be having a conniption for months!
She may vote against this to show her independence, then fall in line with zerocare. I’m not excited yet.
If she does, it pretty much takes care of the whole “SB1070 is RAAAAACIST” crap, doesn’t it?
But perhaps I am getting my hopes up too high. I’m optimistic though based on the snippets I saw in the article from most of the justices.
The DNC will have to try end runs.
This impact their voter rolls.
Illegals, the Incarcerated and the fraudsters are 99% of the DNC base.
My fear is it’s just going to be that one provision. I pretty much expected that one to survive. It will be a disaster if they enjoin the rest.
Hopefully, the SCOTUS actually WILL rule to uphold the AZ law. The federal government has abdicated its responsibility to enforce immigration laws and, IMO, in accordance with the 10th Amendment, it becomes the domain of the states to provude that enforcement.
It’s not difficult to understand unless you are a Democrat.
Eric Holder, you criminal, GTH out of this county! Go to Zimbabwe, where you belong.
Case after case...they’re going to tell Obama and his tailgaters that you can’t just do anything you want. We have a Constitution and we have States Rights.
Actually, fraud and illegals don't comprise more than about 1-2% of the vote in any state or district. And, the Dems don't really use it unless they need it. In battleground states thats why the GOPers need a margin of more than 1% to win because otherwise the Dems will steal it away. With compliant election commissioners they can manufacture (fraudulently issue) 1,000 - 5,000 votes but anything more is next to impossible. They might be able to register tens of thousand of illegals in a larger state. But they still can't alter an election outcome that isn't already squeaker close.
Frankly, I think that 2008 was a banner year for Dem election strategy. They stole the Senate election for Al Franken (margin 312 votes out of 2.4 million) and Mark Begich won in Alaska by 3800 votes out of 400,000 cast -- only after a false accusation of wrongdoing by a federal prosecutor.
Liberal democrats are an agressive, metastatic, invasive, and terminal CANCER to the US. It is only a matter of time, and they know it...
Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. is either (a) choker, (b) arrogant boob who can’t fight a competent opponent (c) RNC mole.
In a way, poetic justice. Franken is a Senate joke. He is kept gagged, in a cloth bag in the Senate cloak room, and released only when he is needed for a rubber stamp vote. The loathsome little toad has become a laughing stock.
Right now AZ has hundreds of illegal immigrants and leftist aka progressives marching in the streets. Demanding this law be removed. With no fear of being arrested for being in AZ illegally. There are large areas of AZ posted by signs from the leftist aka progressive prez bo. Warning people to stay out of these areas. Because the government cannot protect it’s citizens in these areas. You have illegal immigrants with drugs going north. And then you have illegal immigrants with firearms purchased in the fast and whatever program. Heading south.
That may be all that is needed but you can offer no evidence that it does not far exceed that number. We tend to accept election results as long as they don't vary a great deal from the polls. How did Harry Reed win that blow away victory last election?
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.
