AZ Immigration Case: US Gov. argument in doubt?

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
In Arizona immigration case, Supreme Court justices cast doubt on government's argument

The justices asked U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli why the federal government has set up a system for local police officers to ask and answer questions about suspects' immigration statuses if it did not intend for local officers to do so. They also pointed out that the government doesn't have to deport anyone who Arizona officers turn over to them after these stops. "It seems to me the federal government just doesn't want to know who's here illegally or not," Chief Justice John Roberts said. Verrilli denied that and said that once immigration checks become mandatory and a state policy, they interfere with the federal government's immigration priorities and could cause problems with other nations if large numbers of illegal immigrants are jailed in Arizona under SB1070's other statutes. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, part of the court's liberal wing, interrupted Verrilli to tell him she was "terribly confused" by his argument about why the state is not allowed to question people about their status.


Justice Anthony Kennedy, generally the court's swing vote, asked repeatedly about how long someone would be detained while a police officer checked his or her status. "What if it takes two weeks," to determine someone's status, he asked. Paul Clement, representing Arizona, said it would take an average of only 11 minutes. Verrilli countered that it takes 70 minutes, when you take into account the hour wait to get through to the federal government's databases.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...es-cast-doubt-arizona-argument-161745869.html

some good questions....
 
i'm really surprised that the dems didn't pull out an old clinton trick and just deny funds to do status checks, like how they did with the ATF processing applications to restore gun rights.
 
Wow. That is interesting....

I wondered why the Liberals were making this the top topic of the day; but it's obvious they're very worried.

"You can see it's not selling very well," said Supreme Court Associate Justice Sonya Sotomayor. "Why don't you try to come up with something else?"

Those two sentences summed up the federal government's day in front of the United States Supreme Court. Little went the way of Solicitor General David Donald Virrelli in his effort to assert supreme federal authority over immigration


Justice Antonin Scalia asked,"What's wrong about states enforcing federal law? There is a federal law about robbing banks."

Virrelli responded, "…here what we are talking about is….an area of dominant federal concern, exclusive federal concern."

Scalia asked, "Arizona has no power? What does sovereignty mean if it does not include the ability to defend your borders?"
 
Back
Top