Justice says judge ruled correctly in Arizona case

Source: Associated Press

WEDNESDAY Jul 28, 2010 14:20 ET
Justice says judge ruled correctly in Arizona case
By Associated Press

The Justice Department said Wednesday that a judge ruled correctly in blocking the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law.

"States can and do play a role in cooperating with the federal government in its enforcement of the immigration laws, but they must do so within our constitutional framework," department spokeswoman Hannah August said in a statement.

She added that "while we understand the frustration of Arizonans with the broken immigration system, a patchwork of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement and would ultimately be counterproductive."

Read more: http://www.salon.com/wires/politics/07/28/D9H879BG0_us_arizona_immigration_justice/index.html

States cannot usurp the powers of the Federal Government and the Constitution.

Article 6 section 2

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under
the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the
Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Amendment 14

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive
any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Idiots!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The 14th Amendment does apply.


And the moderator has been alerted to your personal attack on the poster you responded to.

This is an example of a State making a law that can negate the rights of American citizens that are Constitutionally protected.

to make your point, problem is, they are not citizens.

BTW I am not a lawyer but i can read the law.

Play nice.

Not just the ones you happen to like.

will still ride and arrest citizens of Mexican decent,when they do I sure hope the feds jail his racist ass.

issue him a pair of pink underwear and send him to tent city.Ummmmm justice not revenge is grand.

If AZ was serious about protecting workers, they would be arresting employers who hire illegals.

AZ has laws on the books that criminalize hiring illegals but have not enforced it ONCE.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2009/oct/arizonas-tough-employer-sanction-law-not-enforced

Russell Pearce doesn't care about the American worker. Ever since he has been in office is to write racially motivated legislation and expand gun rights. He doesn't care about anything else.

The reason why the ruling is correct because that state law doesn't address humanitarian concerns among other things. Refugees and victims of national disasters which the Federal policies address those. Will regular cops know someone that is waiting on application that the government knows about no? Also you have to figure let's say New Mexico or whatever wants to let everyone through. They can't because there has to be a uniform way of dealing with immigration which is national issue. Same reason why the US is the one that declares war instead of states. Montana can't decide on their own to declare war with Canada.

(P)reviewing the Right-Wing Playbook on Immigration Reform; Strategy #8

http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/previewing-the-right-wing-playbook-immigration-reform#strategy8

"It is clear that the party's "tea party" wing will be happy to politicize immigration reform and try to pit American workers against immigrants. Consider Rep. Joe Wilson's folk-hero status on the Right after he shouted "you lie" when President Obama said in a congressional address that the health care reform legislation would not make benefits available to unauthorized immigrants.

Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, who has http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=118347">written that the Bible supports border-focused immigration policy, exemplifies Republican readiness to use both jobs and health care to stir anti-reform sentiment. Here's Rep. Smith in the Washington Times on November 20, 2009:

"If it was not bad enough that illegal immigrants take jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal immigrants, now they will get health care benefits that should go to Americans," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee. "If they were not in the country, we wouldn't have to worry about emergency room or health insurance costs at all. And Americans would have these jobs."

Response to 'Anti-Immigrant = Pro-Worker' Argument

Two recent reports confirm that immigration benefits the American economy, and that immigration reform would boost the nation's economic prospects. http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/docs/Hinojosa%20-%20Raising%20the%20Floor%20for%20American%20Workers%20010710.pdf">"Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," written by UCLA's Dr. Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda and published by the Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center, says comprehensive immigration reform that includes a legalization program for unauthorized immigrants and enables a future flow of legal workers would greatly benefit the American economy - to the tune of $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over 10 years. The report found that a deportation-only policy would result in a loss of $2.6 trillion in GDP over 10 years.

Of the 87 House members who got an "A" from anti-immigration group FAIR:

* 68% voted against increasing the minimum wage
* 83% voted against extending unemployment compensation
* 93% voting against equal pay for women
* 94% voted against the Employee Free Choice Act
* 93% earned an F from the AFL-CIO
* 95% earned an F from SEIU

Enforcement of the laws we have would mean something but that doesn't give states the power to enforce it.

Arizona, the workers paradise. Right.

as in "right to work" - look it up

yes those racist assholes up in Phx are just concerned about workers hahahhahahaha thanks for the laugh!

Decision at http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/AZ_DECISION.pdf