Supremes Told Arizona Law Repels ‘Invasion’

Bob Unruh, World Net Daily, February 13, 2012

A brief filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court argues that Arizona’s contested state law allowing law-enforcement officers to ask about the legal status of people they encounter is justified because of the virtual “invasion” of the state by outsiders.

“As provided in the Constitution, the power to repel against invasions was … granted to both the federal and the state governments,” stated the brief filed by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch.

“This action is consistent with the notion that the federal and state governments are both sovereign bodies within the United States,” the brief explained. “Furthermore, the state of Arizona, with its general police power, a power the Founding Fathers intentionally did not give to the federal government, surely has the power to protect the health, safety and welfare of those residing within its borders.”

At issue before the high court is HB 1070. It was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer in April 2010, only to have the Obama administration sue three months later to block it from taking effect. Oral arguments are pending before the court.

According to documents in the case, the cost of illegal immigration into the United States is estimated at some $100 billion, and state and local governments bear about $80 billion of the load.

{snip}

Klayman noted that Arizona’s passage of the act sought to enforce federal immigration laws by enabling state officers to verify the immigration status of people suspected of being in the country illegally.

The Freedom Watch statement said the Obama Justice Department has “miserably failed” in securing the borders of Arizona and other states.

The group said Arizona was left with no choice but to take charge when faced with the invasion of tens of thousands of illegal aliens, some carrying guns and running drug cartel operations.

Klayman explained that the state has the authority.

He said states are granted the right to defend in the case of a “large scale invasion” and also when there is imminent danger.

{snip}

“President Obama, much like he did with Obamacare, is trying to ram its non-existent immigration enforcement policies down the throats of the American people and will stop at nothing to further illegal immigration to pander to elements of the electorate. This lack of enforcement is intended to benefit him and his Democratic Party during the period leading up to the 2012 elections,” said Klayman.

“With Congress and the executive branch unwilling or unable to provide for additional defenses of the southern border, Arizona is left with no choice but to act. It is clearly within the power of a state to provide for the safety of its citizens.”

{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.
  • Anonymous

    Whoever used the word “invasion” is going to be convicted of hate speech the same way that Emma West was.

    You think that cannot happen in the USA? Just watch it!

    • R P

      Emma West’s trial begins Friday, February 17th, 2012 A.D..

  • Arizona celebrates the centennial of its statehood today, and since it was the 48th state, it is also the centennial of the consummation of statehood in the Lower 48.

    Will Arizona be around to celebrate is sesquicentennial?  At the rate the demographics are going, doubtful.

  • I agree with the argument, but it won’t fly in the Supreme Court.

  • Impertinent

    Actually folks….the only recourse I see for Arizona is to succeed from the US. How else would a sovereign state protect it’s borders if the Feds in their infinite assinity won’t?

    Arizona is involved in a war that it neither wants or has asked for. It has been forced upon it’s citizens the same as WW2 was forced upon the entire country.

    As I see it..the only way Arizona can call out it’s National Guard ( which is under the orders and jurisdiction of the Governor ) to shoot the invaders. Regardless of where they originate.

    Arizona’s survival depends on it’s citizens to repel the criminal invaders that have almost ruined the state. Other states are looking to Arizona for leadership. If Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina , South Carolina and a host of other states follow…we will and should have a new US.

    Does anyone think for one minute that if US citizens were crossing into Mexico illegally that these mutts wouldn’t shoot at them?

  • Count one “vote” already gone for “We” all know that the Affirmative Action hispanic sotomeyer will instantly side with hispanics.

    Also, hold little hope for it was also The “supreme court” of The United States who found it “Legal” for Illegality to Birth Legality (anchor babies) among other Illegal Alien Illegal “rights” they’ve granted.

    • Ditto Stephanie… The “wisa latina”  will do everything in her power to protect her la raza and their invasion being inflicted upon us. In fact, she should recuse herself from even hearing this case, given her well documented associations with la raza.   We are being attacked not with bullets, but with anchor babies and a government that continues to pander to these criminal invaders in the name of diversity!

      • R P

        Please do not use the terms Latino or Latina to discribe their type. Mexican and Pueto Ricans are not Latino. The term has been stolen from the Europeans by the muds in South and Central America.

        • Should I have said  the wise “Puerto Rican?”

    • As a Southerner, the core belief in our right to throw off the yoke of the federal government masters is still strong.  What is being done to us as well as our fellow countrymen, is to rub out our culture and our people.  Perhaps the better way to describe it is “replacement”, substitute a white American with many illegals- mexicans, muslims, africans, you know, the typical follower of the democratic party.  This is leading to wholesale changes in the culture and people in towns and cities everywhere in the South.  For instance, in a small city located less than 40 miles from the state capital of Florida, white folks had developed a nice sleepy town but with a decent enough industry/agriculture to prosper.  Along comes NAFTA and the tomato growers go out of business. So surrounding farmers can’t stay in business and then the little stores in town go out of business.  But wait, the mexican migrants don’t leave, they can go on welfare and hang out on the street or outside of Le Grande Pool Hall.  Young mexicans go to the local public schools and demand bilingual education.  The wealthier whites begin to leave, there is now racial strife between the mexicans and the blacks, whites continue to leave especially now that property values collapse.  This lovely little town that was founded in 1828 has been abandoned to minorities.  Crime is higher than even the largest cities in Florida, the city is now run by minorities.  For some reason a town that could be solvent for over 150 years is now broke, in debt.  Despite its proud past, it is looking shabby and is dangerous to visit.  That is what is in store for all America and that is what they want for Arizona.  But Arizona wants to push back.  I wonder, if the country had known in 1860 what was to become of their country in 2012, would there have been a Civil War?

      Arizona, get your militia together and call for volunteers from the rest of the country, we will come.  We are all Arizonans.

  • I think the US was a much more United country back then. Now I really don’t see to many people up north caring if we lose Texas or AZ or S.California. America is so tribalistic now its really hard to tell. But I get surprised everyday with the things Americans will let slide and other things they will fight tooth and nail for, so you may be right. Time will tell.