Federal Judge Rips Into Obama Regime’s Lawsuit Against Arizona

[Capitalist]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

 

[Cleopatra II]

Only in America!!

 

[Truthmatters]

I bet will go along way in her re election campaign

 

[Avatar4321]

I bet will go along way in her re election campaign

I am sure it would, if she were holding an elected position.

Federal Judges are appointed by the President.

 

[Sinatra]

I bet will go along way in her re election campaign

I am sure it would, if she were holding an elected position.

Federal Judges are appointed by the President.

 

[Sinatra]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

This story is BIG folks - keep an eye on it.

How inept can the Obama adminstration continue to be????

Apparently - no limits....

 

[ConHog]

I bet will go along way in her re election campaign

That is awesome, classic TruthDoesn'tMatter right there. Accusing an appointed federal judge of pandering for votes.


YOU MORON

What a classic fail.

 

[Nate]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

This story is BIG folks - keep an eye on it.

How inept can the Obama adminstration continue to be????

Apparently - no limits....

This will be yet another black eye for the admin... They are running out of eyes...

 

[SFC Ollie]

One would think that the Feds would be happy for the help.

 

[Nate]

From the sound of it Ollie, they don't want the work;

Kneedler said the conflict with federal law comes because the status checks are mandatory, which could lead to federal agencies being overwhelmed with deportation requests. Top officials at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, whose agents will handle most of the calls from Arizona authorities if the law takes effect, have said they will not necessarily respond to every call.

 

[ConHog]

One would think that the Feds would be happy for the help.

That's the stupidest part of the whole thing Ollie. They are and have been getting help from local LEO

ICE ACCESS

ICE developed the ACCESS program in response to the widespread interest from local law enforcement agencies who have requested ICE assistance through the 287(g) program. This program cross-designates local officers to enforce immigration law as authorized through section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

The 287g program is only one component under the ICE ACCESS umbrella of services and programs offered for assistance to local law enforcement officers.

ICE agents and officers will meet with agencies requesting ICE ACCESS assistance to assess local needs and to draft appropriate plans of action. Based upon these assessments, ICE and local agencies will determine which type of partnership is most beneficial and sustainable before entering into an official agreement.

Law enforcement agencies interested in reviewing the enforcement programs under the ICE ACCESS program are encouraged to call their local ICE office or visit US Immigration and Customs Enforcement for more information.

ICE ACCESS

In fact this particular program has been running since 1995

Immigration and Nationality Act Section 287(g) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So only a complete idiot would not know of his agencies own policies regarding state assistance.

 

[SFC Ollie]

From the sound of it Ollie, they don't want the work;

Kneedler said the conflict with federal law comes because the status checks are mandatory, which could lead to federal agencies being overwhelmed with deportation requests. Top officials at U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, whose agents will handle most of the calls from Arizona authorities if the law takes effect, have said they will not necessarily respond to every call.

So our Federal Government is telling us that they do not want to do what they were hired to do.

OK, I can live with that. Fire the bastards, every damned one of them. Starting at the top.

 

[code1211]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

The problem is that this administration is above the law. It enforces those laws that it likes whether they exist or not and ignors those laws that it does not like.

When we used to be a nation of laws, at least for non-minorities, we could count on a fair shake. Now we can only count on a shake down. We live in a pay for preferance society now and if you aren't helping to re-elect the Big 0 you are in danger of losing your rights, wealth and property.

We are now led by a man who sees all things in terms of race and political advantage. It's as if he and his cronies wake each morning saying, "It's pay back time!".

 

[AmericanFirst]

I bet will go along way in her re election campaign

Sounds like the judge is smarter than obama, wait...that is not a hard thing to be, smarter than obama.

 

[ConHog]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

The problem is that this administration is above the law. It enforces those laws that it likes whether they exist or not and ignors those laws that it does not like.

When we used to be a nation of laws, at least for non-minorities, we could count on a fair shake. Now we can only count on a shake down. We live in a pay for preferance society now and if you aren't helping to re-elect the Big 0 you are in danger of losing your rights, wealth and property.

We are now led by a man who sees all things in terms of race and political advantage. It's as if he and his cronies wake each morning saying, "It's pay back time!".

You may be in danger of losing those things, but I have guns, lots of guns, and if it came down to it I would take up arms against a government that attempted to take away my rights.

 

[Liability]

It is a remarkable display of ineptitude by the Obama Administration (and the blame goes all the way to the top) to even publicly "think" about filing a suit against AZ to void the AZ law in question. It makes no legal sense whatsoever.

If one parses out the glaring dishonesty (the bullshit claim that the law is "racist" fror example), and one focuses instead on the primary legal contention (i.e., that this area of law is federally preempted), one is compelled to ask the question. If the law is a matter of federal preemption, but the Feds are not enforcing that set of laws, and the State law doesn't even attempt to change or modify the Federal law, but instead only attempts to provide enforcement OF the federal law, how could the State law be in conflict with the Federal law?

Why is the Federal Government even seeking to bar AZ from doing this? Is the Obama Administration sending out the message that they would be happier if we had open borders? is there any other honest and rational way of viewing the thrust of what the Feds are seeking to achieve?

I am surprised that the Feds took the matter to Court at all, but I am pleased (so far) that the Federal Judge seems to be relying on the independence of the Judicial Branch to ask the right questions. The screwballs in the DoJ and the Obama Administration SHOULD withdraw this incredibly ill-considered legal challenge to salvage at least a fig leaf's worth of modesty.

I'm sure nobody in the Administration has the balls to tell President Obama that he should cut his losses and make a statement to the effect that, upon further reflection, their effort to sue Arizona over this law was a mistake. But that's what the President needs to hear and needs to do. Apologize. Commit to giving immigration policies a thorough review (and also commit to the reversal of the unofficial policy of pandering to the Hispanic community). And focus instead, for a while, on the things that actually matter. Screwing around with a State law like this one shouldn't be even a tiny component of the way the Administration uses its vast resources.

 

[AmericanFirst]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

The problem is that this administration is above the law. It enforces those laws that it likes whether they exist or not and ignors those laws that it does not like.

When we used to be a nation of laws, at least for non-minorities, we could count on a fair shake. Now we can only count on a shake down. We live in a pay for preferance society now and if you aren't helping to re-elect the Big 0 you are in danger of losing your rights, wealth and property.

We are now led by a man who sees all things in terms of race and political advantage. It's as if he and his cronies wake each morning saying, "It's pay back time!".

You may be in danger of losing those things, but I have guns, lots of guns, and if it came down to it I would take up arms against a government that attempted to take away my rights.

That is exactly why the second ammendment was written, but that is another subject.

 

[Zona]

PHOENIX — A federal judge pushed back Thursday against a contention by the Obama Justice Department that a tough new Arizona immigration law set to take effect next week would cause “irreparable harm” and intrude into federal immigration enforcement.
“Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?” U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton asked in a pointed exchange with Deputy Solicitor General Edwin S. Kneedler. Her comment came during a rare federal court hearing in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R).
Bolton, a Democratic appointee, also questioned a core part of the Justice Department’s argument that she should declare the law unconstitutional: that it is “preempted” by federal law because immigration enforcement is an exclusive federal prerogative.
“How is there a preemption issue?” the judge asked. “I understand there may be other issues, but you’re arguing preemption. Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?”
Rest here>>>
​

Did you really say "regime"? LOL

Dittto head much?

 

[Zona]

Anyway, this thing wont pass. If it does, it will break this state.

Gonna get some popcorn. Woohoo

 

[ConHog]

Anyway, this thing wont pass. If it does, it will break this state.

Gonna get some popcorn. Woohoo

well , prepare to be broken then. it will pass.

By the way have you read SB1070 yet? Do you admit that you were wrong on OH so many things about it in that thread way back when? You know the one where I posted bits of the Bill that contradicted your claims and you ran like a bitch?