Deputy Solicitor General and Imperial Underling Edwin Kneedler argued: "It is not for one of our states to be inhospitable in the way this statute does," Kneedler said, citing as his main argument the legal doctrine of "preemption."
Preemption comes from the Constitution’s supremacy clause:
”This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”It basically says that the Federal government trumps the States when acting within the boundaries of the authorities granted to it by the Constitution.
Judge Sarah Bolton (Democratic appointee under Clinton) responded thus:
"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?"
The crayon version: Bolton backhanded Kneedler and told him to go back to law school.
Kneedler claimed that the law is also no good because of severe “foreign relations” concerns…Because America absolutely needs the permission of foreign countries to regulate its own borders. /sarc
Jerking the stick the other way in a desperate barrel roll, Kneedler argued that federal agencies will be overwhelmed with requests if the law stands as is...which is basically saying that the feds are utterly incompetent and can’t do their own job, and it’s not fair that Arizona should make them.
Well, at least Kneedler and I can agree on the first part of that argument.
3 comments:
I'm still flabbergasted that we need new laws to declare something which is illegal (i.e. illegal immigrants) to be actually illegal.
amazing...how does a person that incompetent and ignorant get to hold such a high position in our "justice" system? and amen to the comment about news laws for already illegal things
It's interesting how Arizona has done their law, actually...Recognizing the federal statutes already cover it being illegal, they simply make it more likely that the criminals will be discovered by mandating checks to see if the person (who is already being arrested for another crime) is legally in the country. This steps on no toes on the Federal level, removes possibilities of racial discrimination by mandating it for everyone, and makes life difficult for the Feds who want to shirk their duties.
Post a Comment