Obama sues Arizona over Illegal Immigration
By Brian Kirwin | Tuesday, July 6th, 2010 | PolicyStupid.
That’s the only word to describe President Obama and his Justice Department filing a lawsuit to stop Arizona’s law concerning illegal immigration.
“the Justice Department claims the federal government has “preeminent authority” on immigration enforcement and that the Arizona law “disrupts” that balance. It urges the U.S. District Court in Arizona to “preliminarily and permanently” prohibit the state from enforcing the law, which is scheduled to go into effect at the end of the month. (Fox)”
Stupid because legal challenges to this law are already in the queue by the ACLU and others. Now Obama has just made this issue, which has gone nowhere in recent elections, a pre-eminent campaign topic, and Democrats are nervous.
“This is the wrong direction to go,” Rep. Harry Mitchell, D-Ariz., said in a statement, calling on the administration to devote its resources to border security.
Obama’s lawsuit against Arizona is an odd one, suing a state for addressing a problem that Obama won’t fix himself.
Hey, maybe Obama is gonna sue Louisiana next for having a polluted shoreline!
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
Comments
12 Responses to "Obama sues Arizona over Illegal Immigration"
Obama is pandering, and opening a huge Pandora’s box. Missouri has similar if not even stricter laws on illegal immigration for years. If he’s going to sue Arizona, he’ll end up in legal disputes with every state in the Union. Can’t wait to see how this blows up in his face.
OK–I went a got a Gravatar account and have chosen one. This is just to test to see if it works or not.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by bearingdrift. bearingdrift said: Web: Obama sues Arizona over Illegal Immigration http://bit.ly/auwqtT [...]
It is a ridiculous suit. If you take a look at the complaint and the motion for a preliminary injunction, the political pandering is shocking. Of note, though, Holder relies only on the Fed’s exclusive authority over immigration laws and not anything to do with some kind of racial discrimination.
Surprising what Lloyd writes…from what we’ve been hearing from the O administration, I would have thought the suit would have included specific verbiage about trampling on the civil rights of innocents out for ice cream…
Stupid. That’s the only word to describe Arizona’s new law concerning illegal immigration.
The state can add as many resources to enforce the laws as they need. Instead they want somebody else to fund the resources and violated The Constitution by creating its new law. This case should be a easy one for the courts to determine. Fed law trumps state law…
William, where’s the conflict between the state and the fed? The claim that there’s a conflict with federal law or any meaningful impact on “high priority” items is bogus.
The Constitution supposed to restrict the feds, not the states..
William Bailey, have you read the 17-page Arizona law?
Craig – are you using the same name and email address here that you did when you got your Gravatar? It should work.
I agree that, if the only criterion were politics, this was not a smart move. But there is absolutely no choice about bringing this lawsuit. Holder, Obama, the attorneys who work for Holder, the whole lot of them, all took oaths to uphold the Constitution. Once you take that oath, and have the responsibility of federal office in areas that control the legal positions of the Government, you have to challenge state and local efforts to usurp federal supremacy. The Constitution grants the federal government very few areas of plenary authority, but makes clear that where those areas exist, they cannot be abridged or modified by disparate acts of the many states (or localities).
An easy decision for the courts? Nothing seems to be easy for the courts to rule on. In fact, the courts shouldn’t even have to decide on a topic like this. There is a very easy solution to the problem here. Fix the borders, or get out of the way and let someone who is willing to do so take care of it.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.