Not even a “nice try”. The quote may have pertinence to an injunction, the merits of which are yet to be properly tested at the highest level, but the quote isn’t pertinent to the issue I raised - the right of a state to defend itself from foreign invasion in the absence of effective federal action.
As for whether the AZ’s law actually supersedes federal law, which I agree is inappropriate re immigration, it is my understanding from an initial reading of the law, the writings of reviewers and its authors, that it did not.
I’ll read the decision and review the arguments of the authors of the law. I’ll be back, either to congratulate you or educate you.
Regards,{:^)
The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution is what it is. The judge ruled, and the 9th Circus agreed, that what Arizona did, violates the Constitution.
We can agree on the absence of effective federal action; it's more a question of addressing them in ways that don't violate the Constitution.