Can you explain why this is a blow to refuge/sanctuary cities? I keep seeing remarks about that, but I don't see the logic. If one is found to be illegal in AZ, it's been made clear that the feds aren't going to do anything about it (and apparently, the Court says they don't have to). How does this translate negatively to cities who welcome illegals?
posted on 06/25/2012 5:04:35 PM PDT
(We're not scared, Maobama -- we're pissed off!)
How? The part of the law that was upheld UNANIMOUSLY was written to prevent so-called sanctuary cities from directing their local police to NOT check or ask about status of people they've stopped.
Arizona is free to pass a law with criminal penalties to direct the cops to ask.
Most of the sanctuary city nonsense exists in the 9th circuit jurisdiction ~ so there you have it.
Regarding Obama electing to have ICE not respond to AZ requests on status all that happens there is that AZ gets to hold a bunch of Mexicans hostage, just like obama. Enough more of this retromangancy and we should find almost all the Mexicans in the country tied up in tent cities in the desert.
posted on 06/25/2012 5:15:12 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson