By FITSNews || After refusing to enforce its own immigration laws, the U.S. government is now blocking the state of Arizona from doing so.
In a ruling that sent shock waves across the country (and will likely play a key role in the November elections), U.S. District Court Judge Susan R. Bolton issued a preliminary injunction on Wednesday that bars the state from implementing key provisions of its new law. Specifically, state and local law enforcement personnel will not be allowed to check an individual’s immigration status while enforcing other laws – which the new measure would have permitted. Bolton’s ruling also forbids Arizona from charging anyone with a crime for failing to carry their immigration paperwork – even though federal law already requires legal immigrants to carry such documentation.
Bizarre, huh?
The federal government is basically outlawing the enforcement of its own statutes.
The ruling – which was sought by U.S. Justice Department attorneys acting on the direction of President Barack Obama – basically guts the state’s “controversial” new law, which was set to take effect at midnight. Obama has previously referred to the law as “misguided,” although he has offered nothing beyond vague generalities when it comes to his position on immigration reform.
At the heart of Bolton’s ban is the presumption that the federal government simply doesn’t have the resources needed to secure its borders (which is ironic when you consider the trillions of dollars Obama has blown over the last two years on bailouts, deficit spending and a new socialized medicine law).
“Federal resources will be taxed and diverted from federal enforcement priorities as a result of the increase in requests for immigration status determination that will flow from Arizona,” Bolton wrote in her ruling. “Requiring police to check the immigration status of those they arrest or whom they stop and suspect are in the country illegally would overwhelm the federal government’s ability to respond.”
In other words, the law is bad because it would successfully identify illegal aliens and force the federal government to deport them – which the last time we checked was the whole idea of having immigration laws in the first place.
But the Obama administration – which filed suit against the bill on July 6 – doesn’t want anybody deported. Nearly 500,000 illegal immigrants currently reside in Arizona, and it’s obvious at this point that the federal government is more focused on creating a “path to citizenship” for them than sending them back home.
And that goes for millions of other illegals all across America.
Lawyers for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer – who signed the bill in April after it was passed by the Arizona legislature – are expected to appeal the ruling, and the case is clearly headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
By Crooner July 28, 2010 at 4:54 pm
I’m sure many on this site will note that Judge Bolton was appointed by Bill Clinton.
Tradition dictates that the President acts on the recommendation of the Senator from the state where the Federal Judge will sit. In this instance the recommendation for Judge Bolton came from Judicial committee member Senator Kyl.
By GDI July 28, 2010 at 5:39 pm
To paraphrase Sesui Hayakawa regarding the Panama Canal, we stole this country (from the native americans) fair and square and now we don’t need to give it away. That’s a huge underclass that will eventually become votes for a certain political philosophy. I don’t just mean latinos, but any other ethnic group that is here illegally as well. The cost to the Fed Gov’t as well as the states, for welfare/public assistance/indigent healthcare is huge. Much greater than the INS costs to deport the illegals. The minute an illegal has a child here, its a US citizen, then the parents can’t be deported, can they? The ruling makes sense, from a certain political standpoint. The question is whether the Supremes have the cojones (sic) to do something about it.
By snodgrass July 28, 2010 at 6:18 pm
This ruling has serious implications.
By eggaday July 28, 2010 at 8:21 pm
whoa my Sic friend, Bush spent a right good bit of that bail out money you’re talking about.
and while we are bantering around presidents, can anyone go with CONGRESS being most of the problem… not this or that president.
By Todd, the original one July 28, 2010 at 9:08 pm
This judge knows who signs his paycheck…
By countryboy July 28, 2010 at 9:39 pm
The democrats, including Hussein Obama, in their hearts don’t give a $hit about the Mexicans. It’s all about building the voter base for the future.
By laraza July 28, 2010 at 9:47 pm
VIVA MEXICO!
By The Colonel July 28, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Effffing unbelievable. The Federal Gov’t might be overtaxed if it were required to do its job? Rather than finding against AZ, this dipstick Clinton appointee (Yes, she was recommended by another dipstick named Kyl who wants to give Illegal Aliens 5 years to “get out” – he’s friends with dipstick McCain on the issue – Kyl wanted a favor from Clinton and he appointed her at Clinton’s request) should have found against the Gov’t for failing to do its job in managing immigration and the illegal invasion of our southern border. DHS is already worried about “militias” patrolling the border – this is only going to embolden the militias. The law is not unconstitutional and Bolton never says that it is – she only addresses peripherial issues.
We already have proof of both terrorist related cross border activity as well as evidence of drug smuggling using illegal aliens as mules. It is time to begin addressing the problem and seal the damn border.
By Rick July 29, 2010 at 8:48 am
When the executive refuses to do their job, when congress refuses to do their job and the judicial is seen as activist and thwarting the demands of the public….where will the respect for the law come from? Who will enforce that particular law? Who will hold accountable, the breakers of that law? Remember back to the days of Jim Crow, it wasn’t the law so much as the citizenry refusing to convict based on evidence. What happens when in the case of a trial the jury refuses to convict based upon the color or nationality of the victim? Who loses? Strong fair laws make for good neighbors…this just makes me refuse to consider anything except the immigration status of the defendant…Illegal, ya wouldn’t have been shot/beaten etc. if ya was home where ya belong. Don’t call me to jury duty….
By R July 29, 2010 at 10:27 am
None of you has mentioned the actual issue in the case, but have fun pointing fingers based on politics.
By randy July 29, 2010 at 10:27 am
So the Justice Department sez it’s okay to illegally invade a country and receive free social benefits, then why should I bother to work and pay taxes to support such a dysfunctional system?
We’ve become NOT a nation of LAWS but a nation of corrupt Judges.
By No Name July 29, 2010 at 10:31 am
Mel Martinez promised that when we made them all legal that the fact that they were Catholic would mean they would be GOPers ….all good abortion voters….what happened to the great “We got to get us some brownies to counteract those others”.
Well Jeb and Mel…. big brother George got you the war you needed to distract everyone….and now….well it seems to not being going well at all.
If Barry is a tool…..he is the wrong tool for the time.
Force GOP Senators to go on the record about demanding Barry disclose if he is going to use the Lame Duck session to pass amnesty.
And having Glenn McCrazy be the State politician commenting on all this nationally is just a fucking joke.
Almost as funny as Wendy Taylor running a pander to the Tea party editorial in the Greenville snooze.
By Certified Public Accountant July 29, 2010 at 1:15 pm
Any new updates on the economic impact as illegal immigrants leave the state due to the law
By Skidmarks July 29, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Oh, you poor, senile, misguided Pee Baggers.
- Feds spend $10 billion a year for Border Patrol, National Guard, surveillance aircraft, detention and deportation.
- The Border Patrol had 9,000 agents in 2001 has 20,000 agents now.
- Feds spent $4 billion to build 670 miles of border fences.
The Arizona law is exactly where it should be: in the Federal courts.
Here’s a gee-whiz for you ‘Baggers: Immigration is a Federal matter.
By Billy Bob July 29, 2010 at 6:32 pm
If you cross the North Korean border illegally you get 12 years hard
labor.
If you cross the Iranian border illegally you are detained indefinitely.
If you cross the Afghan border illegally, you get shot.
If you cross the Saudi Arabian border illegally you will be jailed.
If you cross the Chinese border illegally you may never be heard from
again.
If you cross the Venezuelan border illegally you will be branded a spy
and your fate will be sealed.
If you cross the Mexican borders illegaly you will be jailed for two years.
If you cross the Cuban border illegally you will be thrown into political
prison to rot.
If you cross the United States border illegally you get:
1 – A job
2 – A driver’s license
3 – A Social Security card
4 – Welfare
5 – Food stamps
6 – Credit cards
7 – Subsidized rent or a loan to buy a house
8 – Free education
9 – Free health care
10 – A lobbyist in Washington
11 – Billions of dollars in public documents printed in your language
12 – And the right to carry the flag of your country – the one you walked
out on – while you call America racist and protest that you don’t get
enough respect.
13- Country’s rules and laws do not apply to you!
By Joe July 30, 2010 at 8:00 am
Good stuff, Billy Bob…and 14 would be “No taxes”
Skidmarks says “Oh, you poor, senile, misguided Pee Baggers.
- Feds spend $10 billion a year for Border Patrol, National Guard, surveillance aircraft, detention and deportation.
- The Border Patrol had 9,000 agents in 2001 has 20,000 agents now.
- Feds spent $4 billion to build 670 miles of border fences.
The Arizona law is exactly where it should be: in the Federal courts.
Here’s a gee-whiz for you ‘Baggers: Immigration is a Federal matter.”
I’m sure the people in Arizona, who are directly affected (unlike yourself) by the drugs and crime due to the Feds inaction and indifference will take comfort in your 2 cents worth of nonsense.
By R July 30, 2010 at 8:52 am
Hey “Laraza”…F_ _ K Mexico. Why don’t you clean up your cesspool of a country and keep your trash over there?
By DisgustinJustin July 30, 2010 at 10:19 am
The justification for the ruling is an outrage. Doesn’t have the “resources?” Since when is that the business of a judge? She speaks as if she’s the manager of some paper-pushing bureaucracy. It may be a legitimate issue, but it’s not the judge’s or Arizona’s problem.
By RAS August 7, 2010 at 7:50 pm
The original “illegal immigrants” in Arizona and the rest of the US were white people from Europe. Then we in turn were the primary sponsors of the “illegal immigration” into Palestine. A bit sensitive, aren’t we?
By Rick August 11, 2010 at 10:00 am
And Mexicans are a blend of Indians, Spanish and French. The lighter you are, the higher your seen in their society. The more Indian, the more crude and uncivialized. Original inhabitants…naw, they too pushed out the indigenous peoples.