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

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Upholds Key Part of Arizona Law
The Wall Street Journal ^ | 06/25/12 | Jess Bravin

Posted on 06/25/2012 7:50:07 AM PDT by TonyInOhio

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 next last

1 posted on 06/25/2012 7:50:12 AM PDT by TonyInOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

I understood they sent that provision back to the lower court for reconsideration.


2 posted on 06/25/2012 7:53:58 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 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio
Once again the liberal jurist always vote the liberal agenda first while conservative jurist do not.
3 posted on 06/25/2012 7:54:11 AM PDT by ontap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

bkmark


4 posted on 06/25/2012 7:54:17 AM PDT by JDoutrider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

imho this is wishful conservative thinking. I keep hearing that they are allowing the one provision upheld to go back so they can see how it works in practice, or upon further lower court review. It will be challenged immediately.

They strongly upheld the principle that the federal government gets to set immigration policy, and this was in spite of the oral arguments which sounded hostile to the government.


5 posted on 06/25/2012 7:55:14 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

Politico headline

High court strikes down much of Arizona immigration law

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77789.html#ixzz1yojRdj2F


6 posted on 06/25/2012 7:56:52 AM PDT by listenhillary (Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

According to one of the Lawyers from the ACLJ, the key provision was upheld and the three others already had federal laws upholding them.


7 posted on 06/25/2012 7:59:20 AM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

This is SPIN. The “upheld” is even going back for review. This is a major major loss for AZ and state’s rights. Ignore the spin.


8 posted on 06/25/2012 8:00:27 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

Poor logic again by the Supremes.

The Constitution perscribes federal control over NATIRALIZATION. Period.

They used this to say that it also deals with non-naturalization issues like employment, which are NOT naturalization issues.

Like the Commerce clause, they stretched the Constitution to cover areas it did not apply to.

Under their weird reasoning, it is now legal to be an illegal alien. It is also now legal to take illegal employment.

It’s 1984 again.


9 posted on 06/25/2012 8:01:59 AM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

“They strongly upheld the principle that the federal government gets to set immigration policy, and this was in spite of the oral arguments which sounded hostile to the government.”

The two are not mutually exclusive. Immigration policy (and border control) IS a constitutionally mandated FEDERAL concern.

We can’t have each border state creating and enforcing it’s own interpretation of immigration and border control law EVEN IF, as now, the current resident refuses to enforce FEDERAL law.

The “hostile” part of the SCOTUS arguments involved this second fact, not the first.

We here are the first to decry judicial activism as opposed to strict constructionism. In this case, the majority voted in a strict constructionist manner.

We should at least applaud that fact while voting ABO in Novemeber in the hopes of getting a resident who will actually enforce FEDERAL laws.


10 posted on 06/25/2012 8:01:59 AM PDT by PhilosopherStone1000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: listenhillary

Spin.

Look here

http://twitchy.com/2012/06/25/supreme-court-upholds-portion-of-arizona-immigration-law/

The left is already screaming “racist”, so you know it’s bad for them.


11 posted on 06/25/2012 8:02:45 AM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Exactly. Too many of us here are “headline readers”. Read the substance. We got slaughtered in SCOTUS on this today. This is a BAD BAD ruling for conservatives (said the lawyer).


12 posted on 06/25/2012 8:03:01 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I think here the Court fails the US again. They support invasion and overthrow. More and more reason to hold lawyers and judges and police in contempt.


13 posted on 06/25/2012 8:06:59 AM PDT by Rapscallion (Defy by silence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ontap
Once again the liberal jurist always vote the liberal agenda first while conservative jurist do not.

It seems that conservatives are always trying to be evenhanded while liberals never give an inch. That is why compromise always sets up a half life scenario where the libs get half a loaf and next time they get half of our half and so on.

14 posted on 06/25/2012 8:06:59 AM PDT by oldbrowser (Blue state sickness must not be rewarded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PhilosopherStone1000

“Strict Constitutionist manner” would mean that the federal government has control over Naturalization issues, since that is the only provision in the Constitution. All other powers are reserved to the states and the people.

Arizona was not trying to make illegals citizens. It was actually trying to assist federal laws already on the books.


15 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:23 AM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo

>>Too many of us here are “headline readers”.<<

I’m not a headline reader.
The biggest problem I see from this is that AZ calls ICE and they do nothing.

Until Obama is out.


16 posted on 06/25/2012 8:07:37 AM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio
From NBC (headline): High court strikes down key parts of Arizona immigration law

From WSJ (headline): Supreme Court Upholds Key Part of Arizona Law

Different perspectives

17 posted on 06/25/2012 8:08:09 AM PDT by Road Warrior 04 (I miss President Bush! 2012 - The End Of An Error! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RIghtwardHo
So Juan commits a crime, he is arrested and Arizona can now ask him for his papers. Juan doesn't have any so Arizona call the INS. INS says we have a two year moratorium on deportations. Yep. totally slaughtered.
18 posted on 06/25/2012 8:09:02 AM PDT by dblshot (Insanity: electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TonyInOhio

I get it. They are giving the power back to the Feds. This Admin has decreed they won’t enforce the laws at all, but another Admin can enforce the laws as written. We better get a new Admin who wants this country to succeed and thrive. Please God.


19 posted on 06/25/2012 8:09:18 AM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

Jay Sekulow said it’s good news.
Personally, I’m waiting for Mark Levin to weigh in. Hopefully he will call into Rush.


20 posted on 06/25/2012 8:10:52 AM PDT by netmilsmom (Romney scares me. Obama is the freaking nightmare that is so bad you are afraid to go back to sleep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-94 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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