This is not complicated stuff.
It was one of the most practical things the founders did.
For any country, especially any large country, there has to be basic uniformity with regard to questions of who gets to enter the country and how.
So take that, constitutionalists, Or is he missing the point? According to Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (the Johnny-come-lately who opposed S.R.1070 until it passed, and since has ridden on its coattails to a wave of high popularity), “The bottom line is we’ve known all along that it is the responsibility of the feds and they haven’t done their job, so we were going to help them do that.” (Thanks, Andrew Cohen) Is she saying that the law was never expected to survive legal scrutiny, but that it would at least kick the feds in the right direction, maybe prodding the feds to do their job? (Are the feds doing their job?)
- Arizona Immigration law stopped–for now. (Law after the bar)
- Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution and annotations (Consource)
- Arizona Immigration Law: Legal Path Is Blocked, So Political One Must Be Found (Politics Daily)
Related articles by Zemanta
- Was Blocking the Arizona Immigration Law the Right Decision? (politics.usnews.com)
- Arizona to appeal judge’s immigration law ruling (theglobeandmail.com)
- What Judge Bolton’s Injunction Doesn’t Say — By: NRO Staff (corner.nationalreview.com)
- Immigration ruling could send message to states (mysanantonio.com)