OT: Feds to sue Arizona over immigration law

[MaryvalesFinest]

Since most of us are in AZ, thought this would be important news. Whether you agree or disagree with it this is a big thing.

The U.S. Justice Department is filing a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona's new law targeting illegal immigrants, setting the stage for a clash between the federal government and state over the nation's toughest immigration crackdown.

The planned lawsuit was confirmed to The Associated Press by a Justice Department official with knowledge of the plans. The official didn't want to be identified before a public announcement planned for later Tuesday by Attorney General Eric Holder and Homeland Security secretary Janet Napolitano, a former Arizona governor.

The lawsuit will argue that Arizona's law requiring state and local police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic stops usurps federal authority.

The government will likely seek an injunction to delay the July 29 implementation of the law until the case is resolved.

The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws. It is already illegal under federal law to be in the country illegally, although the punishment and enforcement tactics of the Arizona are much more severe.

Tuesday's action has been expected for weeks. President Barack Obama has called the state law misguided. Supporters say it is a reasonable reaction to federal inaction on immigration.

Prior to seeing the lawsuit or receiving any official notification, Gov. Jan Brewer's spokesman called the reported decision to sue "a terribly bad decision."

"Arizona obviously has a terrible border security crisis that needs to be addressed, so Gov. Brewer has repeatedly said she would have preferred the resources and attention of the federal government would be focused on that crisis rather than this," spokesman Paul Senseman said.

Three of the five Democrats in Arizona's congressional delegation, who are facing tough re-election battles, had also urged Obama not to try to block the law from going into effect.

"This lawsuit is a sideshow, distracting us from the real task at hand," Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick said in a statement Tuesday. "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."

The law requires officers, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally.

Arizona passed the law after years of frustration over problems associated with illegal immigration, including drug trafficking and violent kidnappings. The state is the biggest gateway into the U.S. for illegal immigrants, and is home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants.

Obama addressed the Arizona law in a speech on immigration reform last week. He touched on one of the major concerns of federal officials, that other states were poised to follow Arizona by crafting their own immigration enforcement laws.

"As other states and localities go their own ways, we face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country," Obama said. "A patchwork of local immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed."

The law makes it a state crime for legal immigrants to not carry their immigration documents and bans day laborers and people who seek their services from blocking traffic on streets.

The law also prohibits government agencies from having policies that restrict the enforcement of federal immigration law and lets Arizonans file lawsuits against agencies that hinder immigration enforcement.

Arizona State University constitutional law professor Paul Bender said the federal government's involvement throws a lot of weight behind the argument that federal law pre-empts Arizona's measure.

"It's important to have the federal government's view of whether state law is inconsistent with federal law, and they're the best people to say that," Bender said.

Kris Kobach, the University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who helped draft the Arizona law, said he's not surprised by the Justice Department's challenge but called it "unprecedented and unnecessary."

He noted that the law already is being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups opposed to the new statute.

"The issue was already teed up in the courts. There's no reason for the Justice Department to get involved. The Justice Department doesn't add anything by bringing their own lawsuit," Kobach said in an interview

[Miklo]

I'll be watching this thread closely

Debate will be warranted but if anyone gets personal, this is already a public warning so you can expect an actual individual on-the-record warning.

[RaisingArizona]

lol, obama.

[Miklo]

All I know is, that's some serious drama having the DOJ file a suit against a state!

[Kerrsed]

-

Hey Guys, I think we should stay out of this one.

[Mr. Sun]

The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws.

For federal law to be supreme over a state law the power must be exclusively invested in Congress under section 8, article 1, and the power exclusively withheld from the states under section 10, article 1.

The power over immigration was neither granted to congress nor withheld from the states. It is congress who is prohibited from having anything to do with immigration.

[Sun Scorched]

The Fed is getting lawsuit happy.

Suing the State of Arizona, Goldman Sachs, haven't heard about it.. but I'm sure they're suing or about to sue BP.

Goldman is going to embarass the government. I hope Arizona can do the same.

This needs to happen.

At the end of the day, you may not agree with Arizona but you have to respect the right of the states to makes laws like this. It's what our country was founded on.

Originally:
State Rights >>>>>>>>>> Federal Goverment

[WTFsunsFTW]

Originally:
State Rights >>>>>>>>>> Federal Goverment

Then those pesky cars, planes, phones and computers allowed us to be more of a nation than a collection of states that needed to monitor their citizens' needs closer.

I really don't see Arizona coming out victorious here. If anything they will rescind the law and get more federal resources in return.

[Sun Scorched]

Originally:
State Rights >>>>>>>>>> Federal Goverment

Then those pesky cars, planes, phones and computers allowed us to be more of a nation than a collection of states that needed to monitor their citizens' needs closer.

To your mind, when does the government need to stop worrying about its citzens needs? To my mind, when our country is safe, secure and free the government's role should start to diminish drastically.

Social programs, health care and such are things that the private industry needs to solve without government interference.

I really don't see Arizona coming out victorious here. If anything they will rescind the law and get more federal resources in return.

The government is speaking loudly on this one, to be sure, but I'm not convinced they are carrying a big stick. In matters where State's rights are getting tread on, I have to imagine the courts siding with the State. Just my impression of how these things normally work.

But I'm also coming into that impression with the general feeling that there aren't really any Constitutional implications with this whole deal.

Seems to be a State law actually enforcing a Federal law.

[Mr. Sun]

I really don't see Arizona coming out victorious here. If anything they will rescind the law and get more federal resources in return.

I don't know. Liberals on the court been talking up states rights lately. If the feds can't get a quick injunction then it will be interesting. Arizona has the Constitution and its history on its side, but the Feds have the ability to interpret it anyway they please to obtain whatever result they think is politically useful.

[SideSwipe]

I agree that this will be very interesting to watch. It will be particulalrly curious if there are any arguments over the verbiage...lol wwhich come directly from the federal law. Either way I am okay if the Federal government steps up and takes responsibility, that's really what Arizona wanted in the first place. It certainly brings us no joy to have to wrangle with the President over this, we just want serious and immediate action to protect us even more from illegal immigration and all of the associated physical and cultural harm it can bring with it.

I predict this will be yet another black eye on Obama. This argument seems petty and ridiculous and is clearly pandering to the illegal immigrant population which through Obama could get the right to vote. This must fail, and this kind of pandering must stop. I also predict that should the High-Court lean in Obama's favor, that it will take more than laws to stop the effect, unfortunately.

Most likely the DOJ files the suit, asks for an immediate injunction against the law in Arizona to buy time to work out a settlement.

[WTFsunsFTW]

I really don't see Arizona coming out victorious here. If anything they will rescind the law and get more federal resources in return.

I don't know. Liberals on the court been talking up states rights lately. If the feds can't get a quick injunction then it will be interesting. Arizona has the Constitution and its history on its side, but the Feds have the ability to interpret it anyway they please to obtain whatever result they think is politically useful.

The way I see it, however, is that Arizona has no interest in enforcing this law. They are simply getting attention so they can get resources to their state. If Arizona fights the law, they simply have to waste resources to defend the bill, then continue to enforce a controversial law. I dont think they are interested in that at all. They want money and resources. This suit wont go far, Arizona will negotiatite to rescind the law and get cash and assets to deal with the immigration problem at its core instead of after the fact. In a state that has one of the highest forclosure rates in the country and undocumented workers not paying taxes, their primary goal is staying afloat, and not fighting for their controversial rights. Thats what states do that are bored and have no financial crisis

[Sun Scorched]

It feels like our country is treading water right now.

Afraid to do anything for fear of international "bad vibes" and the possibility of (*gasp*) losing a re-election.

I mean, when was the last productive "anything" anyone can remember?

The government botched the Feddie/Frannie thing. Badly. Then blamed Goldman Sachs and the financial industry. Then tried (and is still trying) to regulate it to the point that this economic recovery will turn into a full-blown depression (engage me on this if you're truly interested in the capital markets reform).

Then illegal immigrants got offended, and we started to care. Then the Gulf of Mexico exploded and the government got mad and threatened to take over the clean-up... and didn't, because they can't.

California is bankrupt. Texas is about to seceed. The entire Gulf Coast is rioting. North Dakota sucks in general. New York lost half it's tax base when the government went after bonuses on Wall Street.

I mean, did we all just get hit with a massive (Please Use More Appropriate Word) stick? WTF?

[WTFsunsFTW]

It feels like our country is treading water right now.

Afraid to do anything for fear of international "bad vibes" and the possibility of (*gasp*) losing a re-election.

I mean, when was the last productive "anything" anyone can remember?

The government botched the Feddie/Frannie thing. Badly. Then blamed Goldman Sachs and the financial industry. Then tried (and is still trying) to regulate it to the point that this economic recovery will turn into a full-blown depression (engage me on this if you're truly interested in the capital markets reform).

Then illegal immigrants got offended, and we started to care. Then the Gulf of Mexico exploded and the government got mad and threatened to take over the clean-up... and didn't, because they can't.

California is bankrupt. Texas is about to seceed. The entire Gulf Coast is rioting. North Dakota sucks in general. New York lost half it's tax base when the government went after bonuses on Wall Street.

I mean, did we all just get hit with a massive (Please Use More Appropriate Word) stick? WTF?

Uh health care reform? Im pretty sure mandating the digitization of patient records, requiring health care for all citizens, and regulating the industry to avoid gouging practices can be considered productive.

Student Loan reform? Saved the government 60 billion of the next few years and gave students lower interest rates and better repayment plans? The average student has $20,000 in debt, and im sure they all see the reform act as productive.

[Sun Scorched]

It feels like our country is treading water right now.

Afraid to do anything for fear of international "bad vibes" and the possibility of (*gasp*) losing a re-election.

I mean, when was the last productive "anything" anyone can remember?

The government botched the Feddie/Frannie thing. Badly. Then blamed Goldman Sachs and the financial industry. Then tried (and is still trying) to regulate it to the point that this economic recovery will turn into a full-blown depression (engage me on this if you're truly interested in the capital markets reform).

Then illegal immigrants got offended, and we started to care. Then the Gulf of Mexico exploded and the government got mad and threatened to take over the clean-up... and didn't, because they can't.

California is bankrupt. Texas is about to seceed. The entire Gulf Coast is rioting. North Dakota sucks in general. New York lost half it's tax base when the government went after bonuses on Wall Street.

I mean, did we all just get hit with a massive (Please Use More Appropriate Word) stick? WTF?

Uh health care reform? Im pretty sure mandating the digitization of patient records, requiring health care for all citizens, and regulating the industry to avoid gouging practices can be considered productive.

Student Loan reform? Saved the government 60 billion of the next few years and gave students lower interest rates and better repayment plans? The average student has $20,000 in debt, and im sure they all see the reform act as productive.

Haha, "digitizing"? You mean storing information electronically like regular ole' citizen America has been doing for over a decade? I'm not so sure I'm thrilled with the prospect of the government controlling electronic files of my health.

The government's technological resources are so poor, that when they "bailed out" the banks they literally had to write Goldman and Co. checks because the government's computers weren't advanced enough to do a wire transfer

And student loan reform? I have student loans, and had them before reform, nothing has changed since. Interest rates are locked for those who play it fiscally conservative. Reform does nothing to change a bank's opinion of where your interest rate stands.

What about takling Social Security? Adequate funding for our troops? Failed and money-sucking social programs? Pork-barrel spending? A fracking balanced budget?

Health records saved on somebody's hard drive and something that makes students who are going to feault on their student loands anayways feel better should not be a high priority.

I'm not saying they aren't important, they're just not THAT important. Definately not earth-shattering enough to hang your hat on as far as productivity is concerned.

[WTFsunsFTW]

ok now youre just bitching about your opinions of government and are going to believe whatever you want to believe and any discourse on the subject and just going to further entrench you into your own beliefs.

If obama woke up tomorrow and chopped the head off of a mutant zombie Hitler and erased the national debt, and all the mexicans ran back to mexico, you would still find a way to complain about nothing going right in this country because the guy in charge doesn't have your demands as his main priority.

By the way, please provide a non-biased mainstream source for your "government cant do wire transfers" claim.

[Sun Scorched]

ok now youre just bitching about your opinions of government and are going to believe whatever you want to believe and any discourse on the subject and just going to further entrench you into your own beliefs.

I would have to imagine it would be next to impossible to convince you otherwise on most of these issues. You argue with reason and conviction and I would lose respect for you were you to change your opinion based on one or two posts in a thread on a basketball forum. Don't mistake me for someone who argues blindly, though, you might rob yourself of some entertaining discourse. Don't go nuclear on me quite yet.

My opinions have very little to do with Obama. It's more frustration with the government in general and it applies to both sides of the isle, promise. Obama frankly doesn't bother me, I see him as a break-even.

Am I worried about financial reform? Sure, but that's because I'm around it all day long and it could mean the death of the industry I work in.

I'm more worried about people's dependence on government. It seems everything the government does (and has done through past administrations) is geared, either intentionally or not, towards making citizens more dependent on big government.

If obama woke up tomorrow and chopped the head off of a mutant zombie Hitler and erased the national debt, and all the mexicans ran back to mexico, you would still find a way to complain about nothing going right in this country because the guy in charge doesn't have your demands as his main priority.

I'm not this obtuse. I also don't have demands. My main priority is productively impacting my own life. Would I do things differently? Sure, but so would you.

By the way, please provide a non-biased mainstream source for your "government cant do wire transfers" claim.

Good friends who work at Goldman. Does it actually surprise you?