Appeals Court Stops Ariz. Immigration Law

Stephen Dinan, Washington Times, April 11, 2011

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that Arizona overstepped its bounds with last year’s immigration enforcement law, handing the Obama administration another victory as it tries to squelch states’ efforts on immigration enforcement.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, ruling 2-1, upheld a lower court’s decision that Congress doesn’t want states meddling in immigration. The appeals court said that nullifies Arizona’s attempt to empower local police to detain and question those they suspect are in the country illegally.

{snip}

Arizona’s attempt last year to step up local enforcement of immigration laws sparked a national debate about immigration, and drew praise and condemnation upon the state.

{snip}

Fearing the efforts would spread to other states, the Obama administration sued, saying the national government alone has the power to decide how immigration laws are enforced.

{snip}

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the legislation and became its national champion, said the decision “does harm to the safety and well-being of Arizonans who suffer the negative effects of illegal immigration.”

She and state Attorney General Tom Horne said they will pursue an appeal, either to the full 9th Circuit or to the Supreme Court.

{snip}

The key parts of the law have never gone into effect. A federal district court halted those provisions last year, and they have remained in limbo since that time, pending the outcome of court challenges.

{snip}

“Arizona has taken a reasonable, constitutional approach to compensate for the administration’s dereliction of duty,” said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “Every state has a duty and a right to protect its citizens. I find it ironic the administration has sued Arizona for enforcing the law while [federal officials] largely ignore it.”

One part of Monday’s ruling is bound to attract disproportionate attention: The two judges in the majority referred to statements from Mexican officials that foreign relations would be harmed by the law.

Judge Carlos T. Bea, the dissenting judge, said considering the opinions of foreign governments would essentially give a “heckler’s veto” to other countries.

Judge Bea said the majority’s opinion made attacks on the state law that even the government didn’t make in its case, and said far from intending to prevent states from acting on immigration, Congress at times invites the help.

“The majority misreads the meaning of the relevant federal statutes to ignore what is plain in the statutes–Congress intended state and local police officers to participate in the enforcement of federal immigration law,” Judge Bea wrote.

{snip}

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Question Diversity

    http://tinyurl.com/3epbgkp — My thoughts. A bit long, so I’ll link to them instead of posting them here. I will preview them stating that my reaction today is a bit different than back in July. And also that this is still the process on the injunction phase, not the constitutional hearings.

  • Blaak Obongo

    Some of us have been predicting this from the very beginning. See where “working within the system” gets you, White man?

  • Anonymous

    “Congress doesn’t want states meddling in immigration”

    As the federal debt grows, Congress is under pressure to facilitate growth in the economy. A million plus immigrants per year increase domestic consumption just enough to hide the true declines in productivity.

    Anything that threatens to decrease immigration threatens their ability to continue spending beyond the country’s means.

  • Anonymous

    Mexico isn’t worried one bit about how their illegal aliens are treated on Mexican soil and how it might effect “foreign relations” with their central American neighbors. Just recently mass graves filled with about 116 migrants were discovered in Northern Mexico. And in 2010, Amnesty International said that the widespread abuse of migrants in its territory was a “human rights crisis.” The two judges who used this silly rationale about “foreign relations” are a bunch of America-hating traitors who deserve impeachment from the bench.

  • Anonymous

    When are the states going to look out for their own interests and start ignoring these Marxist Federal court rulings?

  • Tactless Old Pedo

    I’m disgusted but not surprised. I hope the Supreme Court will have the you-know-whats to reverse the appellate court ruling. We need to get RID of these illegals, not appease them!!!

  • WKSIII

    Secede! Can we please start some real progress?! Come on, Arizona, now is your time! Tell them all you won’t stand for this blatant disrespect anymore!

  • GetBackJack

    Any American who does not yet believe that the agenda is world government (no more national sovereignity after America goes and she’s on her way) is living in a self-induced coma.

  • SKIP

    NOW why did I know it would be the 9th circus court from caliFOREIGNER that would cause trouble for Arizona? Bet the ILLEGALS are celebrating now as is the Obamuslim.

  • LOUDMOUTH 57

    “the Obama administration sued, saying the national government alone has the power to decide how immigration laws are enforced.” How? How about enforcing those immigration laws. Period!”The two judges in the majority referred to statements from Mexican officials that foreign relations would be harmed by the law.” Mexico’s invasion of the United States is harming her relations with the U.S.A. and the citizens here.Why can’t Mexico see this from the eyes of U.S. citizens and why should the United States worry about what an invading nation thinks?

  • John Engelman

    The two judges in the majority referred to statements from Mexican officials that foreign relations would be harmed by the law.

    – Stephen Dinan, Washington Times, April 11, 2011

    Those Mexican officials should consider that dumping their unwanted and poorly educated poor people on us will harm foreign relations with the Unites States.

  • Anonymous

    Lets see if the supreme court is filled with criminals as well

    My guess is they are criminals and evil on the supreme court but because they get so much attention, they hopefully will be EMBARRASSED TO RULE that its ok to block laws because mexico doesnt like it

  • Greg

    Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach (who helped author SB 1070) spoke at my university just tonight. He addressed this very ruling with absolute sarcasm and scorn, mentioning how American sovereignty has now been taken away by Federal Judges in the 9th Circuit and given to Mexican officials.

    But he was confident the case would be appealed to the Supreme Court. If Kennedy (who is making good decisions more often than not) votes with the conservative bloc, AZ SB 1080 will be law, setting a precident for other states to soon follow. Kobach was very optimistic about the real possibilities of curbing illegal immigration, and with brilliant constitutional scholars like him-patriotic Americans truly have a voice.

  • patthemick

    I’ve given this matter some thought and have come up with an argument that is both sound and politically correct. The only reason that people come here are for jobs. The main reason there aren’t jobs in their own countries is that their populations have grown larger than the home countries ability to create jobs can handle. Now if we only take the surplus populations of every third world country how long would it be before we had a population too large to provide jobs for. Because they either cannot or wont control their respective birth rates why are we expected to impoverish our own so they don’t have to?

  • Anonymous

    It seems that the time is rapidly approaching for the Arizona Legislature to pass a nullification bill that would set aside *all* court rulings against their immigration law and require the governor and all law enforcement officers to comply with the law regardless of injunctions, etc from foreign courts

  • Russ in the South

    So much for states’ rights.

  • MyOpinion

    Article I, Section 8 only gives the Congress the power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization…” This statement does not give the federal government the power to keep a state from stopping illegal aliens from invading their state. Sheer idiocy upon our part to allow the feds to walk all over We The People.

    Obviously, just another example of the feds abusing their power.

  • dutch henry brown

    patthemick: ride by any construction site and tell me what you see most of the workers are mexican, block layers, framers, drywallers, tapers, plumbers, roofers, clean up crews, landscapers, asphalt crews most are mexican. i live near one of the largest freezer storage plants on the east coast every one of the dock workers mexican. ive been doing construction now for 20 plus years and it is very rare to come across an all white construction crew. even the housing local is hiring mexicans, and i was talking to a few electricians, they were telling me the ibew is looking to start a new ticket for this large number of workers. so when does the work run out for us? it already has, this is why im home now posting to you fine people our jobs are being stolen!

  • sbuffalonative

    “Anything that threatens to decrease immigration threatens their ability to continue spending beyond the country’s means.”

    Illegal immigration (and the entire Federal government) is now nothing more than a Ponze Scheme.

    More consumers to buy more products to generate more revue and requiring more taxes and on and on.

    Like all Ponze schemes, it’s unsustainable and will collapse. We just saw the first major hit with the financial crisis and housing meltdown. We can’t ‘grow’ our way out of a financial crisis when ‘growth’ is what’s causing our problems. The financial concept of “growth” will be the downfall of the US. Then will come the race, ethnic, and religious wars fighting for what remains.

  • John Engelman

    More immigrants mean more customers and more job applicants. By the law of supply and demand this means higher profits, lower wages, and higher profits.

    The high rate of immigration is a major reason for the growing income gap, and the pauperization of the middle class. In addition, a heterogeneous work force is harder to organize than a homogeneous work force. As more Hispanics move to the United States, more white blue collar workers vote Republican.

    A high rate of immigration also contributes to environmental and social problems. It interferes with everything else liberals want to achieve.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    the 0bama administration sued, saying the national government alone has the power to decide how immigration laws are enforced.

    Since SCOTUS decreed in 1941, the federal government has broad and exclusive power to regulate immigration (Hines v. Davidowitz 1941), the feds have wielded exclusive control over immigration, overruling and stripping states’ rights provided for in the Constitution.

    Yet individual states and local governments must bear the brunt of the costs and consequences (such as increased crime) of illegal immigration while the feds do nothing to stop mass migration into its border states.

    According to a Fox News report dated January 19, 2011:

    Immigration watch dog groups have estimated the total cost to California’s economy to be as high as $21.8 billion which would represent 87% of the proposed 2011-2012 budget shortfall.

    The Journal of American Medicine reports:

    Illegal aliens’ free medical care has degraded and closed some of America’s finest emergency medical facilities and caused hospital bankruptcies: 84 California hospitals have closed their doors.

    patthemic writes:

    I’ve given this matter some thought and have come up with an argument that is both sound and politically correct. The only reason that people come here are for jobs.

    Pat: They come here for Free White Money and services that the USG lavishes on them and their children in perpetuity. The menial jobs they work are cash-based, while they and their advocates demand that state governments provide services for them. The cost of lost tax revenue and demand for services in California is devastating.

    Perhaps just as devastating is the exponential expansion of this low IQd, low-skilled population — an expanding non-tax base allowed to reproduce freely and at will; most of my Hispanic students in California come from families of anywhere from six to thirteen children (sometimes more!) — most fatherless and all of whom are wholly dependent on taxpayer-funded government services.

    Meanwhile, California has a drastically reduced tax base and the ratio of welfare dependents vs. taxpayers has increased:

    The effect of raising taxes coupled with the second highest cost of living in the country has caused many legal residents of California to leave the state; an estimated 458,000 people in the last three years alone… foreign-born migration into the state has increased adding an estimated 661,000 people to the state’s total population in the same three year period.

    Hispanics, legal, illegal and the “citizen” children of illegals are also are becoming a huge voting bloc in California and as Pat Buchanan states: They’ll vote themselves more services

    This cannot continue.

    Patthemick writes:

    Because they either cannot or won’t control their respective birth rates why are we expected to impoverish our own so they don’t have to?

    Because the hostile elite that control the government, the educational system and media hate Whites and wish to reduce us to either a small minority, or, more likely an ash heap.

    And, it’s working, they’re winning. And don’t think this is “insanity”; it is not. It has been a carefully planned out and meticulously executed 50-year triangulation against Whites.

    Look at the latest demographic information if you don’t believe me. Look at the actions of a DOJ that boasts “equality under the law” yet refuses to defend Whites. Look at the media that belittles and mocks Whites, refusing to report disproportionate, vicious non-White-on-White crime. Look at the educational system that favors non-Whites and teaches them that All Whites are Genocidal, Evil Colonists who must Pay for any/all misdeeds of any long-ago dead Whites.

    This is what we’re up against: a force that is dehumanizing us Whites, setting non-Whites against us, seeking our destruction and is using government power to do so.

    Bon

  • ghw

    GetBackJack wrote:

    “Any American who does not yet believe that the agenda is world government (no more national sovereignity after America goes and she’s on her way) is living in a self-induced coma.”

    ………………..

    Very true. Just consider this .– During the past two decades we have seen (Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Serbia, Bosnia, etc., etc…. and now Libya) the new pattern that is taking shape: which is intervention by an international coalition in the internal affairs of what formerly would have been considered a sovereign nation. This is done in the name of human rights, humanitarian aide, protecting minorities, etc.

    Thanks to the Georges Bush (both), Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Toady Blair, etc., this has become the new pattern of thinking in international affairs. Countries’ sovereign rights have become subordinated to an international authority that is decided and wielded elsewhere.

    For us, the interesting question is: When does it come OUR TURN to be told (by some international court) what we can and cannot do? When will foreign troops be brought in to overrule American laws and the American Constitution? When it happens, this too will be done, no doubt, in the name of enforcing “Human Rights”, protecting minorities, or something such.

    These judges in San Francisco are already half way there, by accepting the influence of Mexican opinion as superior to American interests.

  • ghw

    Some knowledgeable person wrote a post yesterday explaining that Congress has the power, within the constitution, to curtail the presumptious authority of these overreaching courts — and of the Supreme Court itself — and thus clip their wings and limit the scope of their rulings.

    Americans have been subjected to what amounts to judicial government, originating in the courts, for the past half century, and there is no reason for it. Congress has the authority and could easily correct this inappropriate seizure of power, if it wanted to. But obviously it does not want to.

  • Question Diversity

    20 John Engelman:

    http://tinyurl.com/5wdecmx

    I’m sure you saw that.

    My main knitpick with this study’s methodology is that top 1% of income earners isn’t really super rich. But the results are right — The REAL super-rich, top 0.01%, have had income gains in the last generation that are even more stratospheric than this study suggests.

    Unfortunately, this liberal group is too dense and too full of its own ideology to ascertain why 1976 was the turning point. First off, I think the crossover point was more like 1973, because as PJB and others have demonstrated, that is the year when the standard of living peaked. But what I think happened is gradual reductions in protective tariff rates, which started after WWII, finally started to affect the American manufacturing base starting in 1973, while at the same time, the end of race-based immigration restrictions in 1965 started to affect negatively the wage scale of the American labor pool in the middle to lower ends in the mid-1970s. Both phenomena work to make things worse for most everyone while making things great for the elite. Later similar developments, such as the 1986 immigration amnesty, the enactment of the H-xB visa programs in 1989, NAFTA in 1993, GATT/WTO in 1994, insouciance toward immigration enforcement in the Clinton-Bush-Obama era, only hastened income inequality. Should “comprehensive immigration reform” or the lifting of caps on H-xB visas or further tariff reductions happen, it will send income inequality to the stratosphere and permanently kill the working middle classes, especially for native born white Americans.

  • Browser

    Because they either cannot or won’t control their respective birth rates, why are we expected to impoverish our own so they don’t have to?

    Because the hostile elite that control the government, the educational system, and media hate Whites and wish to reduce us to either a small minority, or, more likely an ash heap.

    And, it’s working, they’re winning. And don’t think this is “insanity”; it is not. It has been a carefully planned out and meticulously executed 50-year triangulation against Whites.

    -Bon

    ——————————

    It’s also working because we (most of us) are kept in the dark about it. This genocidal program is a one-sided war against us that we aren’t supposed to know about. We need to be kept asleep, tranquilized with sports, entertainment, celebrity nonsense, while the replacement war against us proceeds unresisted.

    Our people, in turn, do not have any sort of strategy or planning comparable to the skillful “triangulation” that us being used against us. Not only are our people kept asleep, but so are most of our so-called representatives, who are either blind to this “war” or who have been bought off by the enemy and are actually in its service.

    I realize that many naive, uninformed folks would say this sounds a bit hysterical. (And I agree that to uninformed ears it DOES sound that way!) But they have only to look at the results all around us as proof of its reality. Just look at what has happened to the USA (and all white countries) in recent decades (and more of which is predicted to come). The decline in all our standards — from music to education to morals, the outsourcing of our industries and technology, the demonization of whites, the disparagement of our white history and literature and heroes, official anti-white discrimination coupled with non-white favoritism, the minoritization of white children in the schools… Is that imagination?

    But meanwhile, we’re kept in the dark, assured that all of these wonderful developments are good for us, they make us stronger, and should be “celebrated”. All the while, the anti-white program continues.

    Not one public figure speaks out. Or, after the scorching wrath of the media, he/she would not be a public figure tomorrow morning.

  • white is right, black is whack

    I am terribly sorry if us evil racist, stupid, ignorant whites wanting to defend our own country and culture offends people who hate us and who want to do us harm.

  • WhiteOldie

    Because the hostile elite that control the government, the educational system, and media hate Whites and wish to reduce us to either a small minority, or, more likely an ash heap.

    And, it’s working, they’re winning. And don’t think this is “insanity”; it is not. It has been a carefully planned out and meticulously executed 50-year triangulation against Whites.

    -Bon

    * * * * *

    if anyone has any slightest doubt about this, they have only to refer to the recent article by Tim Wise, which was printed here, gloating over the anticipated demise of the hated white oldies. He leaves no doubt at all about his hatred for us. and his eagerness to see us all gone.

    It is rare that anyone of his ilk drops the mask temporarily and comes right out and speaks their real feelings so openly. Of course, the very next day, he regretted it and was trying to back off, saying that he had been misquoted and misunderstood. But nevertheless, HE SAID IT! And it’s on the record. (The Wikipedia article, immediately following his explosion of hatred, claimed that he had been under the influence of alcohol at the time. But that story was changed a day later too. Well, alcohol loosens the tongjue and reveals the mind, doesn’t it? It often brings out the truth.)

  • Duran Dahl

    “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

    “No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”

    Ones’ options are limited when the treason springs from the courts as well as the other branches of government.

    Remember: “Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” Sir John Harrington (1561-1612)