Arizona law challenged.

[totes6]

Well the Justice Department finally filed suit against Arizona over its new Immigration Enforcement law.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/06/ ... tml?hpt=T1

Washington (CNN) -- The Justice Department weighed in on one of the most explosive issues in American politics Tuesday, filing a lawsuit to overturn a tough new Arizona immigration law that has sharply divided people along partisan, ideological and ethnic lines.

It also asked the federal courts to grant an injunction to stop enforcement of the measure before it takes effect late this month.

Arizona's law requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and allows police to question the residency status of people in the course of enforcing another law. It also targets businesses that hire illegal immigrant laborers or knowingly transport them.

Justice Department lawyers argued in its brief that the state statute should be declared invalid because it has improperly preempted federal law.

"A state may not establish its own immigration policy or enforce state laws in a manner that interferes with the federal immigration laws," the brief states. "The Constitution and the federal immigration laws do not permit the development of a patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country."

The Arizona law "disrupts federal enforcement priorities and resources that focus on aliens who pose a threat to national security or public safety. ... If allowed to go into effect, [the law's] mandatory enforcement scheme will conflict with and undermine the federal government's careful balance of immigration enforcement priorities and objectives."

Arizona is interested only in "attrition" in order to end illegal entries and has not addressed several other federal obligations to deal with immigrants, including removal proceedings, humanitarian concerns and foreign relations, the brief contends.

President Barack Obama said in a speech July 1 that the measure has "fanned the flames of an already contentious debate." Among other things, it puts pressure on police officers to enforce rules that are "unenforceable" while making communities less safe -- in part, by making people more reluctant to report crimes, he said.

It also has "the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound."

Before the government's filing, Arizona's two senators, both Republicans, called the Obama administration move "far too premature."

"Moreover, the American people must wonder whether the Obama administration is really committed to securing the border when it sues a state that is simply trying to protect its people by enforcing immigration law," Sens. Jon Kyl and John McCain said in a statement.

Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick called the lawsuit a "sideshow" in a statement released before it was officially filed.

"A court battle between the federal government and Arizona will not move us closer to securing the border or fixing America's broken immigration system," she said.

Arizona's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, has accused the Obama administration of failing to secure the border with Mexico, thereby forcing her state to act on its own.

"Do your job. Secure the border," Brewer said of the president in a July 1 speech to a Republican group. She pledged to "defend this law against every assault, including attacks by the Obama administration."

Obama renewed his push for comprehensive immigration reform last week, calling for bipartisan cooperation on an issue reflecting deep social and political divisions.

Seeking an elusive middle ground on the subject, the president highlighted the importance of immigrants to American history and progress while acknowledging the fear and frustration many feel with a system that he said seems "fundamentally broken."

He asserted that the majority of Americans are ready to embrace reform legislation that would help resolve the status of an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.

In his July 1 speech, Obama warned that rounding up everyone in the country who has entered illegally would be both "logistically impossible" and "tear at the fabric of the nation." At the same time, the president indicated it would be wrong to offer blanket amnesty for people who came into the United States unlawfully.

Despite Obama's call for bipartisan immigration reform, several senior Democratic sources said Thursday that they see virtually no chance of Congress taking up such a measure before November's midterm elections.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. national poll conducted in late May indicated that public support for beefing up security along the U.S. border with Mexico had grown significantly. According to the survey, nearly nine out of 10 Americans want to increase U.S. law enforcement along the border with Mexico.

Eight in 10 questioned also supported a program that would allow illegal immigrants already in the United States to stay here and apply for legal residency, provided they had a job and paid back taxes.

But only 38 percent say that program should be a higher priority than border security and other get-tough proposals. Six in 10 said border security was the higher priority.

[Chasbo00]

Disappointing, but certainly no surprise. I think the US will ultimately lose this one. Arizona has a pretty good track record in legally defending its laws.

[CowboyT]

And they're not only quoting Federal law, the existing law on this subject in California is actually a bit stricter! I really hope the Feds lose this one, and that they don't get their injunction.

The Bush Administration did relatively little to actually defend the border. But the Obama Administration has taken it to a new level. It is showing outright disdain for defending the border!

[grumpyMSG]

Having spent 2 1/2 months in AZ on Operation Jumpstart. I am hoping AZ kicks Attorney General Eric Holder's butt on this one. Perhaps the Judge will even read the 10-18 page (depends how you print it) law and point out that it's purpose is to assist the Federal Government, not userp it's authority and encourage the Federal Government to perform it's duty.

[Diomed]

So is it now the position of DOJ that states cannot enforce any federal laws within their territories?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

[zephyp]

This federal challenge to the supremacy brings up an interesting question. The feds are saying AZ cannot trump federal law concerning immigration. The Constitution says the federal government will protect the states from invasion.

Ok. Constitution also grants us the second amendment and the feds have several tomes of gun laws. Many states have passed laws far more strict than the fed laws and new ones on top. You see where this is going.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. Why arent our gun groups - NRA VCDL GOA etc having a field day with this?

My guess is its not politically expedient...

[gunderwood]

So is it now the position of DOJ that states cannot enforce any federal laws within their territories?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Hmm, this has potential.

[zephyp]

So is it now the position of DOJ that states cannot enforce any federal laws within their territories?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

Hmm, this has potential.

Nor can states make stronger laws than feds have on the book...read what they are saying...does anyone have the fed brief?

[VBshooter]

Sad when the Justice Department goes after a State and ignores blatant Voter Intimidation for racial and political issues..Sadder is we can't get rid of Holder and his crooked bretheren till Obama gets the boot in 2012,,

[Diomed]

Nor can states make stronger laws than feds have on the book...

That stands a lot of stuff on its head.