Posted on 06/25/2012 3:10:01 AM PDT by Perdogg
1. Az Immigration Case
2. Stolen Valor Act
3. ObamaCare Mandate
4. ObamaCare Severability
10:17
Amy Howe:
The Court rules that Section 3, 5, and 6 are preempted.
10:17
Tom:
Most of the key provisions of SB1070 (3 of 4) are invalidated. One provision is held not to be proved preempted; it must be construed.
Bad result in Arizona case.
No healthcare decision today.
IIRC wasn’t he convicted on multiple shootings? So it could be 40 years for him.
Arizona's law mostly gutted, apparently
Because they can rule whatever they like! Isn't that awesome? Nine people decide when our rights must be respected and when not. Actually, it's often just one person: "Swinger" Kennedy.
http://tinyurl.com/7y8zmdp typed into your browser will get you in
From blog: It was improper for the lower courts to enjoin Section 2(B), which requires police officers to check the legal status of anyone arrested for any crime before they can be released.
It was improper for the lower courts to enjoin Section 2(B), which requires police officers to check the legal status of anyone arrested for any crime before they can be released.
10:18
Amy Howe:
It was improper for the lower courts to enjoin Section 2(B), which requires police officers to check the legal status of anyone arrested for any crime before they can be released.
Decision:
Breaking:
SB1070 on AZ Immigration. Most of the key provisions are invalidated, per SCOTUSBLOG.
Decision on Imigratio law 1070. Fox doesn’t have detail, ANYONE?
Ask her if mobile user are being blocked. Been trying since 9:45 - the page loads, but not the live feed.
After the justices ridiculed the govt argument on Arizona they are going to evicerate the law?
“90,000 online”
Wow, I bet even the Supreme Court of China doesn’t get ratings like that!
From what I can tell, AZ (and US) loses.
U.S. SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS KEY PART OF TOUGH ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW, IN DEFEAT FOR OBAMA
per news wires.
The provision that the Court says is not yet preempted is the “check your papers” provision that commands officers to check immigration status.
CNN says it’s a partial upheld ruling. An immigrant lawyer seems pleased.
Maybe someone can interpret in ‘laymans’ language ...
Here’s the opinion on the AZ law:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-182b5e1.pdf
Scalia dissents, would have upheld law in toto.
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.