Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law, but leaves key provision in place (1070)
Fox News Channel (link added) ^ | 6/25/12 | Staff

Posted on 06/25/2012 7:26:29 AM PDT by pabianice

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 341-351 next last
To: Sacajaweau

“...The very purpose of job for life....was they wouldn’t have to be owing to anyone”

What makes you think the king wouldn’t try it? And who would stop him if he tried that power grab? Our government was made for honorable men—neither obama OR holder qualifies.

101 posted on 06/25/2012 7:58:09 AM PDT by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

But they retained the important part.

102 posted on 06/25/2012 7:58:27 AM PDT by MindBender26 (America can survive 4 years of Romney. She cannot survive another 4 years of an unfettered Obama!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Since we’re also talking about obamacare, has anyone ever explained how people on welfare that pay no taxes can be forced to “Pay” insurance premiums?

103 posted on 06/25/2012 7:59:55 AM PDT by Terry Mross (To My Liberal Kinfolk: Don't call, email or write until you've gotten your brain fixed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

The States need to attack illegal immigration in areas where they have primacy. If, for example, a State refused to issue birth certs for children born to illegals, that is solely within its purview. If the feds disagree, they can issue their own certs.

If a State were to require EVERY citizen to get a work permit (which could be very pro forma, issued with drivers licences for example), and require everyone to provide a permit to work, that is not stepping on fed immigration law.

States are going to have to be more creatively aggressive about enforcing their end of federalism. To me, that’s the upshot of today’s ruling (and the pattern that has led to it).

104 posted on 06/25/2012 7:59:55 AM PDT by ziravan (Are you better off now than you were $9.4 Trillion dollars ago?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoKoolAidforMe

If there is any hope for us we can’t start with a list taht is all conservative republicans to be elected out!

The list has to start with names like Obama, Reid, Pelosi. Otherwise we are sunk.

105 posted on 06/25/2012 8:00:03 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

By that logic if the US has a law against “hate crimes” that means the states can have one since the US preempts them.

106 posted on 06/25/2012 8:00:03 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26; P-Marlowe

Nope, not quite. They said the court sent it back to the lower court.

Article says: “One section — allowing police to check immigration status after legal stopes — sent back to 9th District Court for review.”

The 9th District simply has it back; they don’t have instructions to permit police to check status. They could do that, but only time will tell.

107 posted on 06/25/2012 8:01:12 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau; kevkrom; pabianice; vikingd00d; txrangerette; xzins

From live ScotusBlog:

Justice Scalia would uphold the Arizona statute in toto.

Justice Scalia began his dissent by saying that he would uphold all parts of the Arizona law.

Justice Scalia is not only dissenting from the bench, but he has produced a written copy of the bench statement for the press. It is 7 pages long.

108 posted on 06/25/2012 8:01:27 AM PDT by thouworm (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
"Why are people here attacking a couple of justices and attacking Bush over this?"

Because they are so certain that their interpretation of the Constitution is the ONLY correct interpretation--even though it contradicts the words and intent of the Founding Fathers.

The Constitution is not even close to ambiguous on this issue, states do NOT have the right to institute their own policies on immigration or naturalization just as they cannot enact treaties with foreign nations outside of the wishes of the federal government.

In all these cases, the federal government exercises absolute authority.

The real problem with the decision is that the SCOTUS apparently saw no remedy for states when the federal government is NOT doing its constitutionally mandated job.
109 posted on 06/25/2012 8:01:51 AM PDT by Sudetenland (Member of the BBB Club - Bye-Bye-Barry!!! President Barack "Down Low" Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye
Yep, this country is going down the tubes to ruin.
When does Rush tell us it is time to emigrate?
110 posted on 06/25/2012 8:02:04 AM PDT by Cheerio (Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

LOL, gimmee a break. How would you expect them to act? They have the base to keep excited. The will spin any decision as a win in some way for the obumbler.

Stopping what may turn out to be illegal aliens for infractions is not much of a problem since cars have broken tail lights and such and if you watch someone long enough they will violate some traffic law. Once stopped their status can be determined legally. If found to be illegal they can be shipped out.

111 posted on 06/25/2012 8:02:21 AM PDT by scram2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: redgolum
Makes me think the health care mandate will be allowed to stay.

Makes me think this is the umpire's "makeup call" (albeit, announced first) for killing Mengelecare.

112 posted on 06/25/2012 8:04:01 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Arizona tried to mirror the Feds law on immigration.

now Arizona should go back and sue the Feds to uphold federal law.

113 posted on 06/25/2012 8:05:59 AM PDT by stylin19a (Obama - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Perhaps we can use this to our benefit. Since the court has now held that not only do the the states not have the “obligation” to enforce Federal law, it appears that they now do not even have the “right” to enforce federal law. Therefore, as Gov. of Arizona, I would say to the Feds, “we no longer will provide any assistance in enforcing Federal law as it relates to collection of taxes, enforcing any Obamacare provisions, etc.”. Essentially, for all Federal laws, “you’re not getting our help - good luck with that”.

How could a court come back and now say, “you’re not allowed to enforce THIS federal law, but you MUST enforce others...”

114 posted on 06/25/2012 8:06:35 AM PDT by jcwky (Our response?...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Terry Mross

Section 8 of the Constitution authorizes Congress to set up a uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States. This never was an issue for states’ rights.

Arizona and other states should sue the US government for failure to enforce Congressionally-adopted laws regarding naturalization (and illegal aliens). The “we can’t wait” argument would be as dictatorial when made by the states as it is by Obama, in my opinion.

115 posted on 06/25/2012 8:06:50 AM PDT by Piranha (If you seek perfection you will end up with Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland

Agreed. I’ve argued before them and I HATE that. It’s not a game and, often, they act like it is. I hate the “we are royalty” feeling SCOTUS projects.

116 posted on 06/25/2012 8:06:59 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: perfect_rovian_storm; dfwgator

To p_r_s:

For once we agree...

That I know of, anyway.

Those who say Obama won this are beyond stupid.

Those who attack Roberts and Kennedy forgot to notice, the ruling was UNANIMOUS.

The provisions that say it’s an AZ crime to enter AZ illegally and obtain employment there have been ruled to be pre-empted by federal laws already in existence.

The law against illegal immigration remains in effect, the court ruled 8-0 that it’s a federal law and cannot at the same time be a state law.

It upheld for now the provision that cops in AZ can ask for legal status information in the normal pursuit of their law enforcement duties, apparently leaving door open a crack to have another go at the issue, later.

We wish the whole law was upheld as it was written.

But with a unanimous decision how can people keep attacking a couple of justices??

To dfwg:

Kennedy was a Reagan appointee.

Roberts, a W appointee, was joined by every other justice except the recused Kagan.

117 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:05 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR." - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: xzins


118 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:23 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

Could AZ appeal a ‘no’ decision by the 9th Circus back to the SCOTUS?

119 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:23 AM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom
How long before someone sues to stop "sanctuary city" practices on the basis of this decision?

Who would have "standing" to do so?

120 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:47 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 341-351 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson