You Have Got To Be Kidding - Arizona's Law Gutted By Federal Judge

Federal judge Susan Bolton has accepted the Obama DOJ argument that Arizona's law regarding illegal aliens is preempted by federal law. She has, for all practical purposes, wholly gutted the Arizona law with respect to illegal aliens. (You can view the Court's Order here) And in doing so, the judge has realized my worst fears. When I analyzed the federal law suit several weeks ago, I wrote:

Invoking preemption in the present context is a dangerous game indeed. It is critically important to note that the Arizona law is little more than a codification of federal law as regards illegal aliens, . . . Thus the DOJ's argument must be that any state laws predicated on the status of an individual as a citizen or an illegal alien are preempted by federal law.

Think about that for a moment. If the DOJ wins this lawsuit, only the federal government will be able to enforce laws based on illegal aliens. We will become, in essence, a sanctuary country with states, for all intents and purposes, constitutionally prevented from inquiring into the citizenship status of people within their states. As a nation, our ability to address the problems of illegal aliens, already bad now, would be compounded exponentially.

That is now where we stand today. This from Legal Insurrection confirms my assessment:

States have been left helpless to deal with the anarchy created by the failure of the federal government to enforce border security. Whereas yesterday it was unclear how far states (such as Rhode Island) could go, today states are powerless.

The inability of a state to implement a policy of checking the immigration status even of people already under arrest for some other crime is remarkable.

We are in serious trouble. True, what the judge issued today was a Temporary Restraining Order and not a final judgment. But based on the Judge's reasoning, I see no reason to suspect that she will rule otherwise after a full hearing. Let's get that over with and get this thing up to the Supreme Court.

Update: Several people have weighed in with good legal analyses of the Judge's order, and I can't improve upon them. See Andrew McCarthy, Peter Kirsanow, and Mark Levin.

Take Away Question: Why the hell is our federal government siding with illegal aliens?

Read More...

Summary only...

Pro-Illegal Immigration Rally

John Hawkins at RightWingNews has posted twelve of the most offensive signs from the "pro-illegal immigration" protests. I wonder why these signs haven't gotten anywhere near as much media play (actually, they have gotten zero media plas) as, well, pick any sign at one of those racist hated filled tea party protests. Here are a few of the signs:







Does anyone catch the cognitive dissonance - the Latino protestors speak . . . Spanish - a European language. Not surprising, since the majority of Mexicans are in fact a mix of SPANISH and Indian lineage.

Moreover, this smearing of "Europeans" is, like most racist screed, historically ignorant in the extreme. Many tribes in South and Central America were far more warlike and savage than any European nation thought of being. Unfortunately, they committed one cardinal sin. They never developed to the point that they could successfully defend that which they had conquered. Too bad that. Then there is the lunacy of illegals coming north to work in, well, a functional country, yet pining to reunite parts of the U.S. with Mexico. Somehow, the cognitive dissonance seems lost on them.

Do see RightWingNews for the rest of the pictures. And do see this from Victor Davis Hanson as he tries to put all of this in context.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pregnant, Illegal, & Crossing The Border

Congress has heard testimony estimating that more than two-thirds of all births in Los Angeles public hospitals, and more than half of all births in that city, and nearly 10 percent of all births in the nation in recent years, have been to illegal immigrant mothers.

George F. Will, A Birthright? Mabye Not, Townhall.com, 28 March 2010

While I am a strong proponent of a very liberal immigration policy, we have a real problem with illegal immigration that will require a change to our Constitutional interpretation to fix. As it is now, the 14th Amendment is being interpreted to provide that anyone born in America is automatically an American citizen, irrespective of whether they are born to people in this country legally. This provides a peverse incentive for pregnant illegals to enter America to give birth. And it is the subject of George Will's most recent columnn.

A simple reform would drain some scalding steam from immigration arguments that may soon again be at a roiling boil. It would bring the interpretation of the 14th Amendment into conformity with what the authors of its text intended, and with common sense, thereby removing an incentive for illegal immigration.

To end the practice of "birthright citizenship," all that is required is to correct the misinterpretation of that amendment's first sentence: "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." From these words has flowed the practice of conferring citizenship on children born here to illegal immigrants.

A parent from a poor country, writes professor Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school, "can hardly do more for a child than make him or her an American citizen, entitled to all the advantages of the American welfare state." Therefore, "It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry." . . .

If those who wrote and ratified the 14th Amendment had imagined laws restricting immigration -- and had anticipated huge waves of illegal immigration -- is it reasonable to presume they would have wanted to provide the reward of citizenship to the children of the violators of those laws? Surely not.

. . . [T]here is no constitutional impediment to Congress ending the granting of birthright citizenship to persons whose presence here is "not only without the government's consent but in violation of its law."

Will's point is a very good one indeed. It should be the starting point for immigration reform. But it would seem that Obama's answer will be simply to offer complete amnesty to all illegals, the position supported by SEIU and La Raza.

Read More...

Summary only...

Interesting News From Around the Web - 12/12/07

This is a must-read/watch at Gateway Pundit for many reasons, not the least of which is to put into perspective the threat of orthodox Salafi Islam and Khomeinist Shiaism and all the virulent criticism you will find of it across the net, including on this blog. That criticism cannot be read to implicate your average Muslim in this land. My hat is off to Hassan Askari who jumped into a brawl to save four Jewish men being beaten in an anti-Semitic attack on New York’s subway. I can go one farther to say that, of all the many Muslims I know, there is not a one among them whom I would have any reason to believe would act any different than Mr. Askari.

Also at Gateway Pundit, a humorous Shriek Alert as Hillary lead vanishes. She really is an imperious and hypocritical ass.

RedState looks at a manufactured controversy over remarks by Mitch McConnell that, taken out of context by those who really have no use for our soldiers, are claiming shows McConnel as a "heartless chickenhawk." As a non-chickenhawk, let me say that I concur in RedState’s assessment. Let me say also that this "chickenhawk" label is utterly ridiculous. If you follow the logic of the left, the penultimate "chickenhawk" was Bill Clinton. And to carry it to its logical conclusion, think Pelosi and Hillary attempting to dictate military strategy in Iraq. The neo-liberal left has no intellectual honesty. And as one more aside, it was the transition to an all-volunteer military that has gifted us the most professional military force since the days of ancient Rome.

The NRO endorses Romney in the Republican primaries, finding his social conservatism the deciding factor in distinguishing him from Giuliani. It’s a well thought out piece, though, not being a true social conservative, I disagree with its conclusions. (Hat Tip: Villagers with Torches)

There are two systemic threats to Democracy that gnaw at the base of the system. One is the flow and control of information. The other, more direct threat, is voter fraud. Several authors have argued persuasively that voter fraud has played a decisive role in past elections. The effort to control voter fraud through i.d. requirements at the polls is now before the Supreme Court. Faultline discusses the issue in light of illegal aliens.

Conservative Heresy? Hillbilly Politics discusses the "conservative case" for universal health care. This is a troubling issue. There is not a system of socialized medicine yet that can compete with the somewhat free market healthcare system in America. That said, I happen to concur with the concept of universally available healthcare in the U.S. How to have it without also having all the problems of socialized medicine is beyond my limited intellectual capacity to work out, nor do any of the proposals I have seen floated by Democrats strike me as effective.

Al Qaeda has suffered a huge blow in Iraq, but that hardly spells doom for the larger organization. Right Truth examines al Qaeda terrorism in Northern Africa and the threat it poses to Europe, particularly France.

Bayes analysis, the logic of threat assessment, some past intelligence failures of note, and the NIE on Iran are discussed in an exceptional essay at PJM by the Belmont Club’s Richard Fernandez

They can have my Samuari sword when they ply it from my cold dead hands – so sayeth Q&O. It is a sad commentary on what has become of UK. The socialist government believes in complete control of its citizens – after all, the left know what is best for their citizenry. This means that they cannot be trusted with any means of self defense. If a person is hurt by someone misusing a weapon, than that weapon must be taken out of hands of the populace at large.

A good post on atheletes who have transcended their sport at Politics and Pigskins.

An unusual alliance aimed at attacking the failed policies of those in power. Heh.

An interesting analysis at Liberty Corner of the largely negative role government has played in changing our values for the worse, and arguing that the state must affirmatively act if it is to reverse the damage done.

Read More...

Summary only...