[EternalVigilance]

not a “popular” or “trendy” ruling, but a constitutionally correct one

I disagree.

While Congress obviously has sole constitutional power to set immigration and naturalization policy, the AZ law simply mirrored federal law.

And remember, these particular laws are laws that are in fulfillment of the absolute constitutional obligation by the United States to secure the states from invasion.

To tell the state of AZ that they cannot, in the absence of federal fulfillment of its most important duties, enforce these laws is to say that they cannot defend themselves.

And the right of self-defense is God-given, unalienable, intrinsic.

[TonyInOhio]

Yesterday's big news among the Lefty chattering class was that the publisher of the SCOTUS Blog predicted that the mandate would be upheld. Today we learn this:

"Tom: One disclosure re the health care cases: Kevin and I filed a brief for the AARP in support of the mandate. But our client knew that we'd be objectively reporting on the decision."

Now we find out that he actually represents AARP and filed a brief in the case urging that the mandate be upheld.

Who ever said Lefty lawyers weren't slimy bastids?

[joe fonebone]

The states cannot pass any law pertaining to immigration and naturalization policies.

Period

But, your fears are indeed justified

So, what is a state to do?

Time to jump all over the backside of the state attorney general

document, and place a dollar amount, on everything that the illegal’s have cost, including attacks on citizens.

sue the federal government for said costs..

Have the ninth circus rule that the states cannot sue the feds..

Appeal to supreme court

Win your case

Perhaps, with a little forethought, arizona could have taken this action first, instead of trying to pass a law that could, would and should never pass constitiutional muster..