hilary (1)

The 10th Amendment of the Constitution is just one more part of the United States Constitution that Barack Obama finds objectionable. While NOT deliberately spitting on two different*** Arizona laws (created because of federal government dithering over the little matter of immigration law enforcement to help border states) or on the Constitution itself, Obama’s disdain for real American statesmanship and the real American Constitution is obvious. To think just seventeen short months ago he rose his hand and swore to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" -- after his actions of those past months who can ever believe anything the man says? Obama and his administration have expressed “grave concern” over both Arizona illegal immigration laws but is going to court to fight the most recently written one. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, spoiling for a fight on 10th Amendment grounds called Obama's decision "outrageous" but "not surprising" after Obama administration officials confirmed Friday that they plan to file a lawsuit challenging the state's anti-illegal immigration law. "Our federal government should be using its legal resources to fight illegal immigration, not the law-abiding citizens of Arizona," the fiesty Brewer said.

Meanwhile, the Arizona Attorney General, Terry Goddard, said his office plans to withdraw as the state's lawyers in legal challenges to the law, leaving Brewer's handpicked attorneys to defend it. Goddard, a Democrat said to be planning to run for the Arizona governorship for a third time after two earlier failures to win election, and Brewer a Republican have squabbled repeatedly about the law. To a certain extent that’s not been a bad thing.

After Goddard made his objections known to the earliest permutation of the Arizona law, A) the original law was strengthened B) provisions were added to directly address Goddard’s and Obama’s and many Democrats’ objections to the possibility of police officers using the new law as an excuse for “racial profiling” and C) Brewer had a special provision added saying that the Arizona governor could defend the new version of the law however she chose, rather than being required to fight legal challenges to the law and her state’s rights to protect itself from the illegal invasion from the south (which has made Phoenix the #2 kidnap city in the world only behind drug capital Bogota, Colombia) with a lukewarm state attorney general in center stage. Brewer said "I will ensure the immigration laws we passed are vigorously defended all the way to the United States Supreme Court if necessary, where this reasonable law will ultimately be found constitutional," something she wasn’t sure Goddard was prepared to do whole-heartedly.

The law taking effect July 29 requires state police officers to question a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion that he or she is in the country illegally. Five or six legal challenges have been filed to the law since April virtually all claiming that the new law will lead to “racial profiling” and it’s the federal government’s responsibility to regulate immigration. Duh! And what about the present climate when the federal government believes illegal immigration benefits it? Mr. Obama has made no pretext of defending the border. He is seeking so-called comprehensive immigration “reform,” a weasel term meaning the power to grant citizenship to the 14-25 million illegals now in the country since it's generally accepted that 80% or more of them would vote Democratic and ensure Obama’s re-election in 2012. He has thus far been told he hasn't the votes to pass such a bill into law.

On Friday evening, June 18, Brewer's defense team asked a federal judge to throw out suits by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups challenging the law's constitutionality. Recently, Obama officials confirmed plans to file their lawsuit after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an interview with a TV station in Ecuador (nice that U.S. citizens hear about the matter from a foreign TV station, eh?) earlier this month that the administration would challenge the law in court, though officials had long said the issue was under review. The administration at this point is just building its case and definitely expects to file suit. Brewer told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren, she's ready for a fight.

"What a disappointment," Brewer said on Thursday, adding she was shocked the administration would make such an announcement on foreign TV without giving Arizona officials the news first. "We are NOT going to back away from this issue," Brewer said. "We are going to pursue it, we're going to be very aggressive," Brewer said. "We'll meet them in court ... And we will win. The citizens of America agree with Arizona."

Meanwhile the Obama administration has thus far failed to deliver promised National Guard troops to the border states. Obama’s original promise was to send unarmed National Guardsmen to “relieve” the paperwork and other pressures from U.S. Border Patrol officers . . . but even that pathetic pledge has been broken.

Ya’all live long, strong and ornery,

Rajjpuut
*** Obama has also let known his displeasure with an earlier Arizona law that allows the state to suspend the licenses or refuse licensing of businesses repeatedly violating the national immigration laws by KNOWINGLY hiring illegal aliens. Attorney General Eric Holder has called both laws "unconstitutional." Apparently, in the case of the employers' law, once again Eric Holder has not read the law he's criticizing. The latest provision to the nation's immigration laws along those lines passed in the mid '80's says that the Federal Government canNOT get involved in licensing of businesses and that aspect is left for state regulation.
Read more…