Supreme Court Strikes Down Key Parts of Arizona Immigration Law

The U.S. Supreme Court has released their opinion on the controversial immigration law passed in Arizona striking  down parts of  the law. However, the court upheld a key portion that lets law enforcement officials check the immigration status of people they stop.

The 76-page opinion that was handed down by the Supreme Court on Monday morning can be downloaded here.

Comments

  1. Well, at least the key provision was found Constitutional. Now, when someone shoots themselves in the leg on Senseny Road late at night, the cops can ask if they are here legally.

    On the other hand the Obama adminstration has just come out with this

    Homeland Security suspends immigration agreements with Ariz. police

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/25/homeland-security-suspends-immigration-agreements-/

    “The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.”

    How many more laws is Obama going to ignore and/or not enforce?

    Only 133 days left of this lawless adminstration

    • Wow I felt the same way after the first Bush admin while he was running again. I think you will be as disappointed as I was then.

      • I doubt it.

        In fact, those that think Obama still has even a chance at winning are not in touch with reality IMO. This ruling, and Obama’s subsequent actions of telling the various federal agencies to no longer cooperate with Arizona on matters of immigration, has sealed his fate with the average American. The only ones left on his side are white liberals, who make up about 20% of the electorate on a good day, the people that don’t pay taxes, homosexuals and illegals. Opps, excuse me, disenfranchised democrats. Nice coalition, huh?

        Regardless, there aren’t enough of them to overcome the tide of people that will be voting not necessarily FOR Romney, but rather to get RID of Obama and replace him with someone that will uphold his oath to protect and defend the Constitution

        132 days

  2. Jen's Eric says:

    Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

    The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

    Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

    What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

    How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

    And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

    But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

    Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white

    • valerie says:

      Jen’s eric please tell me you didn’t (or don’t) attend school in clarke county. I’m surprised that this sort of comment was allowed through the CDN filters. Absolute pointless ignorance and completely off topic. This is about immigration – not race mixing.

      Disgusting.

      • Right Winger says:

        Illegal immigration is not about the color of one’s skin, and has nothing to do with race. We have non-citizens crossing our borders daily to find work, and we have employers who are all to eager to hire them for lower wages because they can get away with it. Until we combat this problem on BOTH SIDES of the issue, it will never get resolved. Deport the illegals, and stick a $500,000 fine on EVERY OCCURRANCE of hiring illegals. Go after the people that rent to them as well. And if a politician has an illegal or two in their employment, remove them from office immediately and fine them as well.

        Quit the political pandering to the illegals. They are criminals by the very fact that they crossed the border illegally. They don’t have a right to vote anyway. It’s not their country, it’s ours. The legal CITIZENS of the USA. Where we still have neanderthals walking among us.

        • valerie says:

          Speaking of both sides of the issue – there is rarely any political discussion on the process of LEGAL immigration in this country because we are so busy not doing anything much with all the people that come here illegally. I’ve first hand experience with the legal route, being that my husband is a Canadian citizen – currently on a two year green card. The process is extremely daunting, very expensive, and will not end for us any time soon. That being said, if he were to get stopped by law enforcement in Arizona, it is extremely doubtful that he would be questioned about his immigration status because he’s white and speaks English, albeit with a French accent. And this is where people cry racism – these sorts of laws don’t fix immigration policy or give avenues for legal residence. They target a certain demographic and for the folks within that demographic who are here legally – well, I can see where they’d be a little aggravated having to prove their status based on the fact that other people have broken the law.

          • It’s no more aggravating then when I travel out of the country and have to show that pesky passport and visa. Why the nerve of those damn Germans, making me show that I’m in their country legally!

            And if you are here legally but not yet a citizen well, I guess that’s the hassle you go through for the PRIVILEDGE of coming here and trying to become a citizen. People here are spoiled and lose track of the fact that it is a PRIVILEDGE to come here,and in a lot of cases it’s a step WAY up over the countries immigrants left behind

          • valerie says:

            So a hispanic US citizen living in Arizona should accept having to prove they are here legally whenever asked by law enforcement? That certainly isn’t close to showing a passport going through customs..

            You can go on and on talking about necessary hassle and privilege – my point about my husband being Canadian wasn’t about griping that he may possibly have to prove his legal status, obviously since we are on the right side of immigration law – we’ve been proving and paying all sorts of requirements since 2009. My point was that he is white and would probably not be asked to prove his legal presence by law enforcement and that is a totally inefficient way to go about finding and deporting people here illegally. The only way to effectively end the masses of workers coming from South America is to go after the employers that hire them. That’s where the money is and money is the entire reason people cross and work illegally. As adamant as you are about upholding US citizens rights, I find it sad that you think US citizens of hispanic descent should have to have their rights compromised. Typical conservative – you have no qualms deciding that brown US citizens take one for the team..

          • If they are so “hassled” by having to show ID, then maybe they should join local law enforcement efforts and turn in those people they know to be here illegally.

            I had to show an ID yesterday to get a library card for my daughter. What’s the big deal?

          • valerie says:

            sarge – this is where your ignorance of the legal immigration process is apparent. you can have a valid state issued i.d. and NOT have legal presence in the US. you can get a social security number with certain types of visas and valid (though temporary) I9s stamped in your passport and the NOT fulfill the requirements to maintain the visa you entered upon or properly adjust your status. Ever heard of marraige visa fraud? Happens quite often, and those immigrants are capable of getting what they need to start a life here, get a job, have a valid i.d. – that doesn’t mean they are here legally once a year or so passes.That is why I would like DHS and ICE to focus on the employers that hire them.

          • Another View says:

            SO; rather than have the federal government enforce immigration law–its job–you would go after private employers for offering jobs to people? Hmm. Would these be the same employers who are sued daily for job discrimination for not hiring enough Mexicans, women, blacks, etc.? Your solution is to discourage private employers from hiring Mexicans?

            Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

            Why don’t we just demand that the federal government do its job? Why is that not the solution?

          • valerie says:

            Another view, no my solution is to hold employers accountable for verifying the legal status of the people they employ. Plenty of private employers already do that. You and I both now that it is certain areas of industry that turn a blind eye to hiring illegal immigrants. If it were extremely difficult for these people to find work, they wouldn’t look at crossing illegally as a viable option to support their families.

          • Another View says:

            I also know the perils and costs of being accused of hiring discrimination, and the difficulties of verifying legal presence. It is not just like turning on a light switch.

            What you seek to do is to force business to do government’s job. That is not how it does, or should, work.

            Force government to do its job. Immigration and border control is in the Constitution, as opposed to socialized medicine; make the government do what it is required to do before taking on things it is prohibited from doing.

            You would not like it if my business forced you to do its job. It is similarly unacceptable for you to advocate that government delegate its responsibilities to private business.

          • By requiring employers to verify the legal presence of their hires, the Federal Government would not be delegating the responsibilities of ICE – which would be deportation. Hefty fines for employers hiring people without lawful presence is much different than asking employers to not only identify illegal immigrants but also deport them. Yes it is the responsibility of the Federal Government handle immigration and border control – but employers have a responsibility to follow legal hiring practices. There needs to be a uniform system and communication between USCIS and employers AS WELL as local law enforcement. As it stands now, there is very little communication between USCIS – NVC – ICE – IRS and the Department of Social Security . These entities should be working together. I think you’d be surprised at how little information these agencies share.
            On one hand you are stating that we should force the Federal government to do it’s job, but then firmly placing the burden upon individual States local law enforcement. Doesn’t make much sense. I have little faith in our Federal Government to pull off such a huge undertaking, the massive over spending beast that it is, the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing..etc..Anyone who actually wants the problem solved shouldn’t advocate approaching from the political side of things because it just isn’t going to happen.

          • Another View says:

            No. We don’t demand that private business do government’s job.

            The Constitution makes it the federal government’s job to control immigration and the borders. The federal government is not doing its job. The answer is not to push the responsibility and costs onto private business.

        • Keenque says:

          I think we all know which political party is going after the illegal vote.

          I know whenever I vote here in Clarke County I have to show ID. Some see that as a bad thing (I’m speaking nationally).

    • JP Marat says:

      The phrase “final solution” was used as code for something else before in history too, I believe.
      So, according to your logic, if you’re anti-racist you’re anti -white? Guess I have to turn in my white person membership card!
      Disgusting.

    • Lonnie Bishop says:

      CDN…how did this hate-filled crap get past the “filters”?

  3. Ah Jes Luv Jurassic Clarke says:

    To paraphrase President Reagan, “Mr BlogMeister, tear down these words”

    Abject hate has no place on this forum

  4. Mr Mister says:

    Isn’t it a bit comical that there are people here that reason away “racism” by acknowledging there are Caucasians in the US that are illegal, and say they commit fewer crimes, hence are not “undesirables”. And say “if I went to another country, I wouldn’t have an issue showing my ID”. For some of the people getting harassed by continuing to show ID, THIS IS THEIR COUNTRY! They are being asked only because the color of their skin and by their race. Believe it or not, there are legal Hispanics in the US and even in Clarke County. Get use to it and learn to live with it. This is not the old south as you wish it was.

  5. Another View says:

    Valerie, you are just plain wrong. ICE’s responsibilities go beyond deportation. It is to also control the borders.

    You are shifting enforcement responsibilities to the employer. Why should the employer have to wonder as to one’s legal status in the country?

    And what about grocery stores? Should they be forbidden from selling groceries to illegal aliens? How about landlords? Should they have to verify potential renters’ legal status? Or any other merchant? What if illegal aliens come across the border to purchase goods? Why not require merchants to verify that you are in the country legally before selling you something?

    And finally, let us not forget government! After all, the government demands that illegal aliens receive free public education and other benefits! Are you arguing that if is fine for the federal government to provide illegal aliens with benefits paid by tax dollars, but it is not okay for an employer to hire someone who is here illegally? That is nonsense!

  6. Another View – I can see you’re a champion parrot for your preferred political leaders. Unfortunate, but that is precisely the reason this county will never have proper immigration reform. You should try learning more about these perceived “benefits” that you’re so certain that the Federal Government mandates tax payers provide for illegal immigrants. You are completely misinformed, but you do a very good job regurgitating what your political party of choice has told you to be angry about. Why don’t you try posing those same questions you just asked me concerning employers and grocery stores and ask yourself how effective it will be to have State or local law enforcement asking everyone to “show their papers”. Speaking of papers, what ARE those papers? Good luck finding that out – there is no one “paper” or ID for that matter that can uniformly prove citizenship or legal presence in the United States. But it sounds simple enough, right? Bottom line – you don’t know much of anything about immigration – legal or otherwise.