Friday, July 9, 2010

The Arizona Immigration Law is Likely Unconstitutional but Not Racist

President Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, had the Department of Justice file a lawsuit on Tuesday this week against the state of Arizona and its governor, Janice Brewer, in response to the state’s having passed a law meant to enforce the existing federal law on illegal immigration. President Obama, many congressional Democrats, and much of the national media has portrayed this law as racist and insists that it will result in far greater racial profiling, despite the fact that the state of Arizona specifically went back and amended their law to ensure that this would not be the case. Further, Governor Brewer issued Arizona State Executive Order 2010-09 to further clarify this fact. Excerpts from this order state,

“WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1070 requires a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state, county, city, town, or other political subdivision when lawful contact is made and reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, to reasonably attempt, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation; and


WHEREAS, Senate Bill 1070 provides that the immigration enforcement by police agencies shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens…” (emphasis is mine)

Now despite the Obama administration’s public relations attempt to couch this law as racist, the DOJ lawsuit does not mention this as a reason for the impetus of this lawsuit. Rather, the suit argues that,

"The United States Constitution forbids Arizona from supplanting the federal government's immigration regime with its own state-specific immigration policy, a policy that, in purpose and effect, interferes with the numerous interests the federal government must balance."

So one must ask the question, if this is the government’s case against this state law, and as much as I understand and can appreciate the reasoning behind Arizona’s passing of this law I suspect the federal government does indeed have a solid winnable case with this argument, why does our president and most Democrats rail against this law for its “inherent racism”? The fact is that they cannot claim such in a court of law, because the Arizona state law merely enforces existing but unenforced federal immigration law. There is no racist element attached to the law; rather, there are assurances built into it to mitigate the likelihood of any racist intent occurring.

Governor Brewer said in a written statement, "It is wrong that our own federal government is suing the people of Arizona for helping to enforce federal immigration law. As a direct result of failed and inconsistent federal enforcement, Arizona is under attack from violent Mexican drug and immigrant smuggling cartels. Now, Arizona is under attack in federal court from President Obama and his Department of Justice."

She went on to point out "the irony" of suing Arizona for its immigration enforcement law but ignoring cities and other local governments whose "patchwork local ‘sanctuary’ policies instruct the police not to cooperate with federal immigration officials." Governor Brewer is correct on this issue. If the federal government is going to make a legal case against states (and other political subdivisions) for making immigration laws in support of the federal government, should they not also be suing those municipalities that have enacted their own immigration laws declaring their borders to be “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens in violation of federal immigration law also?

The bottom line is that Arizona in its frustration over the lack of federal law enforcement in the protection of our borders and citizens accordingly has passed what is likely an unconstitutional law meant to be a catalyst to inspire the U.S. government to enforce existing federal laws. The Arizona law is not racist; The Obama administration and congressional Democrats know this, despite rhetoric to the contrary. Equal protection under the Constitution is not being enforced, as the federal Department of Justice is still turning a blind eye to sanctuary cities, and in the end this whole issue is a cynical ploy by the Democrats to hopefully expand their future voting block in the years to come as they cry for “comprehensive immigration reform” whereby to grant amnesty to illegal aliens.

This issue is nothing more than being about the consolidation of power through the expansion of the Democratic voting base. The feigned compassion for these people would quickly evaporate if it appeared that a majority of them, upon being granted United States citizenship, would become registered Republicans. That is how you know what this debate truly is about, my friends.

2 comments:

free0352 said...

Wow, what a nice new look to this blog, who did that?

Would they do mine? LOL

T. Paine said...

I was bored and found the new blogspot design templates. Glad to see you back on the net again, Free.

I have had a tough time defending common sense without you, my friend!

Hope all is well and that you are getting settled at your new posting.