Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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.

http://scotusblog.wpengine.com/


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


To: thouworm

Scalia’s dissent makes clear how silly is any other opionion striking down the Arizona law. If the Constitution had a clause saying that Congress can pass immigration laws that the president can on personal whim enforce or not enforce, and that states are powerless to address, then Constitutional Convention would never have allowed that to pass.

It is insanity, and it is extremely troubling that Judge Roberts sided with the majority.

How in the world does it violate federal power for a state law to completely mirror the federal law but violate a presidential whim?

Arizona should put their national guard on their border against an imminent threat, a power reserved to them as Scalia pointed out.


148 posted on 06/25/2012 8:28:55 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 108 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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