What’s the Difference Between the Two Federal Lawsuits?

Recently, the Department of Justice has decided to take the State of Arizona to court over their new immigration law. This lawsuit is another way to take power away from the states and allow them to enforce the laws that the federal government ignores. Additionally, this lawsuit is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Even though, the Arizona immigration law follows the federal provisions (which prohibits racial profiling), the Obama Administration is suing on the basis that Arizona’s law will be a direct act of racial profiling.

Why is Arizona’s new law considered a “civil rights” issue? Arizona is merely cracking down on illegal immigration and enforcing the law, while the federal government is ignoring its duties to enforce the law.

Human Events reports that Arizona is fighting the Department of Justice lawsuit. They have every right to fight. Arizona has one of the highest crime rates in the nation, and with the federal government refusing to address the issue of illegal immigration, the state had to take matters into their own hands by enforcing the law.

“We’re not going to be intimidated by the Department of Justice,” said Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. “The federal government should be asking for our help instead of suing us.”

Arpaio plans the sheriff department’s 16th illegal immigrant sweep to coincide withSB 1070’s implementation date.

SB 1070 author and state Sen. Russell Pearce, (R.-Mesa) said the Justice Department lawsuit is merely “a continuation of the federal government’s failure to enforce federal law” and “violates” federal statutes by “consciously failing” to uphold the laws of the land.

Pearce rejected the government’s notion that SB 1070 will overwhelm the enforcement and judicial federal system that concentrates only on “serious” immigrant criminals. Pearce plans to introduce legislation meant to strip American citizenship from the “anchor babies” of illegal immigrants born in the United States. Certain to be challenge if passed, the courts would have to re-interpret the 14th Amendment’s citizenship rights to uphold such a law.

State Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, (D.-Phoenix) opposes the SB 1070, but said the lawsuits should “settle questions” over what states can do when federal laws are inadequately enforced.

“I hope this galvanizes Congress to gain the moral courage they need to address this crisis,” Sinema said.

The Obama Administration again believes the federal government controls the states ability to enforce laws. We can also take a look at another lawsuit.

When the Commonwealth of Virginia took the Obama Administration to court over the federal health care mandate, the lawsuit was viewed as a waste of taxpayer dollars. Why? Was it because Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli recognized that the new mandate takes away the state’s right to set legislation or the simple unconstitutionality of the legislation? The residents in the Commonwealth of Virginia have the liberties to choose whether or not they want health insurance coverage. It’s their choice to do so. The legislature in Virginia recognized that, and Cuccinelli is challenging the federal government on the basis of this state law.

Сейчас уже никто не берёт классический кредит, приходя в отделение банка. Это уже в далёком прошлом. Одним из главных достижений прогресса является возможность получать кредиты онлайн, что очень удобно и практично, а также выгодно кредиторам, так как теперь они могут ссудить деньги даже тем, у кого рядом нет филиала их организации, но есть интернет. http://credit-n.ru/zaymyi.html - это один из сайтов, где заёмщики могут заполнить заявку на получение кредита или микрозайма онлайн. Посетите его и оцените удобство взаимодействия с банками и мфо через сеть.