Why the federal court challenge to the Arizona law will fail..

@xfahctor (14118)
Lancaster, New Hampshire
June 20, 2010 1:35pm CST
Or at least, why it should fail. If one is going purely on the basis of case precedent, there is no shortage of it. There are plenty of cases but I will focus primarily on the more relevant ones, but will also list the rest for reference purposes. 1983,United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Gonzales v. City of Peoria, 722 F.2d 468 “Although the regulation of immigration is unquestionably an exclusive federal power, it is clear that this power does not preempt every state activity affecting aliens.” Rather, when “state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement is authorized.” The Court accordingly held “that federal law does not preclude local enforcement of the criminal provisions” of federal immigration law.” So here we see that the courts have agreed the states have concurrency with federal law. Lets now look at United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez: 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit United States v. Vasquez-Alvarez176 F.3rd 1294 “this court has long held that state and local law enforcement officers are empowered to arrest for violations of federal law, as long as such arrest is authorized by state law.” This seems to reaffirm things in even plainer language and takes things to their logical legal conclusion that state law can mirror or enforce federal law. For more references and other issues surrounding the other issues with the Arizona law such as search and seizure, racial profiling (which federal law allows for by omission of prohibition)... In 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held, in United States v. Rodriguez-Arreola, 270 F.3rd 611, that a state trooper did not violate the defendant’s rights by questioning him about his immigration status after pulling him over for speeding. In 2005, the United States Supreme Court held, in Muehler v. Mena, 544 U.S. 93, that police officers who handcuffed a gang member while they executed a search warrant for weapons, did not violate her rights by questioning her about her immigration status. The Court explained, “[E]ven when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual; ask to examine the individual's identification; and request consent to search his or her luggage." The information is out there, no one is bothering to even considering it and are instead arguing this with hyperbole and rhetoric with out much basis. The courts have already ruled numerous times that this is perfectly legal, too many people are simply using the new Arizona law as political artillery fire...unfortunately, they are only loading it with blanks.
2 people like this
9 responses
@millertime (1394)
• United States
20 Jun 10
I think you are right, their challenge will fail, or at least it should. We'll see how much power and control the Obama administration has over the courts. I find it interesting that he is showing how little regard he has for the law. He and his administration are basically saying they don't want to enforce existing federal immigration policy and they are even going to go the extreme of taking states to court to prevent them from trying to enforce immigration law. I believe they have the same disregard and even dislike for our Constitution. It says a lot about his agenda and how they go about things. I always thought that upholding and enforcing law was part of the oath of office. Maybe I was wrong. Or maybe in the case of the Obama administration, it only applies to the laws they selectively choose to enforce and uphold. They'll just ignore the ones they don't like and then try and punish anybody else that tries to enforce them. This kind of heavy handed behavior seems to be the way this administration operates. Obama came from the Chicago style, thug politics and he is continuing the same style in the White House. They have been running a propaganda and misinformation campaign against the Arizona law since the beginning and this court challenge is just another tactic to try and force immigration reform. Here again, we have the administration trying to go against the will of the people and force something through that the majority of the people don't want. Overwhelmingly, most people in this country support the Arizona law, support tightening our borders and controlling illegal immigration, yet Obama is going to do everything he can to get what HE wants and not do what WE want. They clearly don't care about the people and don't believe in majority rule. If they keep going the way they are going, not doing what the people want and showing flagrant disregard for our laws and Constitution, they are going to open themselves up to a legal challenge they might not expect. If they go against their oath of office, I believe that is grounds for impeachment.
• United States
20 Jun 10
I think Obama is banking on the Latino gratitude votes to help secure popularity in future elections for himself and the democratic party.
@dboman (457)
• United States
20 Jun 10
Very well said millertime. This is pretty much exactly how I feel about this administration (seriously, I had to make sure I didn't post this in my sleep or something). I'm always glad to see more people who can see exactly what is going on with this administration...it seems so clear to me, but I could be completely insane. I would like to correct something you said though: "I believe they have the same disregard and even dislike for our Constitution." "I believe they have the same disregard and even disdain for our Constitution." -fixed. :)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Well, yeah, California had a law similar to this about 100 years ago, and failed miserably. It was seen as racist. No real good can come out of this law.
• United States
23 Jun 10
I think that if an illegal alien rapes or murders anyone they ought to be deported.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Well California, sadly, is very pro-illegal alien. That's why they have sanctuary cities like San Francisco where it is literally a CRIME to report an illegal alien even if they are arrested for rape or murder. Even the extremely liberal mayor of San Francisco opposed that garbage (eventually), but the city council approved it almost unanimously against his wishes.
1 person likes this
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
3 Jul 10
lol Task...if I remember correctly, the state of Texas pretty much gave the world court the finger on that and executed the slime ball anyway.
1 person likes this
• United States
9 Jul 10
I hear that the US Government is trying to sue Arizona because of this law they just passed. How in the world is the Government going to sue a state for a job that the government is supposed to do, but is too lazy to do it? I don't understand. Being here illegally is against the law. You break the law you should be punished! I'm sick and tired of hearing hispanics scream and yell like little 2 year olds having temper tantrums about it. There are lots of illegals from all over the world. It's amazing how Border Patrol could care less about hispanics, but will do anything in their power to boot out Canadians, Russians, British, people from India, Asia, and etc... The hispanics have it pretty good here. Stop acting like fools!. Now I'm all for Arizona taking matters into their own hands. Illegals are making the states go bankrupt. Illegals get free health care, free food stamps, free housing. Us legal Americans are denied everything if we're in debt and need help because the money we put into the system, has gone to help illegals. Take a second to really think about it. Illegals suck so much money out of the government yet they don't pay taxes, or pay the money back. Essentially all legal American's who play by the rules are paying for these people who'd rather pay 10 Grand to be smuggled here instead of paying 2 Grand to come here legally and fill out the paperwork to get a Green Card. It's sooooooo stupid! I just hope Florida is next to pass the same laws! I'm sick of illegals causing so much trouble!
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Nice work on the research there X. I'd actually brought up the Muehler v. Mena and Texas v. Brown a while back regarding racial profiling. I think the thing that gets me the most is the way so few have actually read the bill and instead, behave like sheep just believing everything they hear from Obama and Holder (who haven't read it) or from left wing media. The media would have you believe everyone is against the bill despite the fact that ever poll has shown the majority support it.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Oh, I found one even more directly related to the Arizona law. "In 1975, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a case called United States vs. Brignoni-Ponce. In that case, a roving unit of the U.S. Border Patrol stopped a vehicle near the Mexican border and questioned the occupants about their immigration status. In this case, the court wrote, "the only ground for suspicion is that the occupants appear to be of Mexican ancestry." In a 9-0 decision, the court ruled that "because of the important governmental interest in preventing the illegal entry of aliens at the border, the minimal intrusion of a brief stop, and the absence of practical alternatives for policing the border, an officer, whose observations lead him reasonably to suspect that a particular vehicle may contain aliens who are illegally in the country, may stop the car briefly, question the driver and passengers about their citizenship and immigration status, and ask them to explain suspicious circumstances; but any further detention or search must be based on consent or probable cause." http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/may/04/jan-brewer/arizona-immigration-law-rewrite-lays-rest-worries-/
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
21 Jun 10
So, that would mean that challanging Arizona on this issue is basically just grandstanding in order to appear to be doing something? I'm sure the feds know that there is case precedent which is not in their favor.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
21 Jun 10
"I'm sure the feds know..." They haven't even read the bill yet Spall. As far as I'm concerned they, and by that I mean Obama, Holder, Napolitano, and pretty much every moron in his administration that's blasted the law, haven't read the 17 page bill and know NOTHING about it. Pretty sad too since I read the thing on my lunchbreak over a month ago. I have yet to hear any of them actually answer in the affirmative when asked if they've read it. Seriously, it's the simplest piece of legislation I've ever read in my life without extensive legalese or unrelated crap thrown in. I wish all legislation were that simple. Of course you are 100% right about the grandstanding, but that's what 90% of politics is.
@dboman (457)
• United States
21 Jun 10
Precedence, or the law for that matter, doesn't always apply when you have judicial activism though...
• United States
21 Jun 10
For me,i am not from here in the US i am an immigrant but i do agree about the arizona laws about immigration laws. I want all the immigrant who will come here in US to seek good life is that they come in here in good faith. They will obey and follow the necessary things to do.They should undergo of what did i went through filing my visa,passport,interview with the US console and of course spend money so that i can come in here. I think it is not fair for someone who will just come in here and sneak in to the border so that they can get in here and live and work. I do not think that the new law is racial profiling i think that is also one way of preventing crimes coz i do admit and admit also people out there most of the immigrant that has no paper will be easier for them to commit crimes coz it is hard to trace them coz they are untraceable. I thingk this law is just and nice for the development of a certain conutry.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
3 Jul 10
Sorry i didn't get back to you sooner...I just wanted to thank you for respecting our laws and doing this right. Welcome to the U.S.....very glad to have you aboard!
@laglen (19759)
• United States
21 Jun 10
X - great topic and thank you for the info. I believe they know they haven't a leg to stand on. But this may be an issue of Obama knowing the Supreme Court. Look at the justices and justice coming. Bader-Ginsberg will be retiring soon, so Obama will be filling that position. Somebody else stated above that perhaps Obama owns the court. I guess we will find out soon! Also to be mentioned, is what it will cost American Citizens to file this suit and what it will cost the people of Arizona to defend it. In a time where they should be tightening the belt, they are blowing yet more of our hard earned money...
• United States
20 Jun 10
I hope and pray you are correct! I am so disgusted that no one has had the balls, except Arizona, to do something about the infestation of illegals, who are sapping so much from our country!
@dragon54u (31636)
• United States
21 Jun 10
I believe it is another distraction to keep us from paying attention to what is really happening. Take our attention off the economy and jobs and the takeover of private industry and focus it on an incendiary topic that will further divide the people. Holder knows he can't win a lawsuit--or shouldn't be able to--but Obama knows it will be a powerful, dividing distraction to his taking over private industry. We have to refuse these distractions and pay attention to the corruption that is shoving its way through our front door.