Posted on 06/25/2012 3:10:01 AM PDT by Perdogg
1. Az Immigration Case
2. Stolen Valor Act
3. ObamaCare Mandate
4. ObamaCare Severability
That's meaningless if the state can't do anything with the information other than send a report to the Feds.
Not so. You don't understand what was in AZ 1070 and what the court decided. Read the decision including Scalia's dissent.
“What was Roberts’ opinion?”
Besides, having Roberts vote with Kennedy on Obamacare will only be bad news if Kennedy votes to uphold the law, and if Kennedy votes that way Obamacare will be upheld even if Roberts voted to strike it down. Roberts’s vote to uphold Obamacare would only be dispositive if Roberts votes to uphold while Kennedy votes to strike it down, which I can’t fathom occurring.
If anything, Roberts having Kennedy’s back in the AZ case may portend good news for the upcoming Obamacare opinions release. Roberts allowed Kennedy’s AZ opinion to become the Opinion of the Court instead of a mere plurality, which I’m sure Kennedy appreciated, and it didn’t really cost us anything with respect to the AZ law because had Roberts dissented the 4-4 vote would have let the 9th Circuit’s opinion stand (and it wouldn’t hurt us in the long-run, either, since Kagan wouldn’t have to recuse herself when the Alabama law got to SCOTUS and it would surely be struck down 5-4 even with Roberts dissenting). Roberts being on Kennedy’s good side could be what clinches Kennedy’s vote with the conservatives on striking down Obamacare.
Emotions can run high on all these SC issues--and "states rights" is a HUGE issue.
Yet on this one, I think SCOTUS is agreeing that "immigration" IS a Federal issue, and states cannot pass laws that supercede or infringe on those laws.
However, as I hope Scalia's dissent will point out, the frustration the States have with this President's failure to enforce Federal law needs to be addressed. And perhaps the best way to address this concern would be for the states--and Congress--to bring to the Court a direct and immdeiate challenge to the UNCONSTITUTIONALITY of an Executive Branch order that blatantly declares the intent to NOT uphold Federal law!
Apparently the decision was in line with long standing precedent, and commerce clause precedent does very little to offer encouragement that Obamacare will be struck down.
Just my opinion, but I think the fire in these decisions will all be in the Scalia dissents.
That is a wonderful solution. Let AL and SC do it too and flood the state of NY with illegals.
“everyone thought would be upheld.”
Hrm? Some of us when the law was issued predicted it would be found unconstitutional for precisely the reasons that Roberts stated.
Speak for yourself, sir. You do not speak for us.
Simply brillant. I now remember that you were, or are, a lawyer.
On second thought . . . give them an airplane ticket . . . then no chance of them stopping at any state they choose on their way to NY.
And if TSA is a problem . . . charter PRIVATE full plane loads at a time.
We’ll have to sit tight and see later this week. As I said upthread, my confidence is high that the individual mandate will be struck down. My fear is that the rest will be upheld. I hope and pray that Scalia is in the majority on healthcare. I cannot see him agreeing to anything but the total rejection of Obamacare.
I love you.
And if these illegals have broken the law, they will be detained and arrested. It will be then up to ICE to act.
I am not saying this was a big victory for us, but it is not a total loss. Section 6 was the other critical portion of the law. That is the real disappointment. But Congress can remedy that by authorizing the states to do this. We need to change Congress and the WH.
We also need more states to adopt Section 2B and AZ's e-verify law, which was upheld by SCOTUS.
Why not send them all to DC, the only place left with lots of money?
Arizona needs to start giving free bus rides to NYC for Illegals. Let Manhattan become little Mexico.
If NYC is no good, then try LA or SF.
There’s nothing else they can do, so start sharing the problem.
Get a fleet of old school buses and start rolling.
Depending on Scalia’s dissent, that may embolden the States to do just that.
Unfortunately (or fortunately), the SCOTUS won’t be in session again until just about time to vote the current WH resident out.
“You don’t understand what was in AZ 1070 and what the court decided. Read the decision including Scalia’s dissent.”
I have. I predicted when it was issued that it would be found unconstitutional. So, if I correctly predicted the outcome, why are you asserting that I don’t understand the case?
It’s got nothing to do with the ‘liberal wing’ or the ‘conservative wing’. Roberts isn’t ‘compromised’ based on this one decision. It’s the correct constitutional outcome to uphold in part and strike down in part.
The only question was whether it was something like 9-0, or whether the court would issue a massive dissent to show disatisfaction with Obama. Scalia, Thomas, Alito all got to post their dissents.
This was the best outcome we could have hoped for on this bill. I’m happy with it.
O Laz, you are SO easy!:)
Many are missing the point: The ruling was consistant with previous rulings. Immigration law is in federal law territory NOT a state issue. This way each state, say CA, CANNOT pass laws making immigration easier in their state. It makes immigation laws consistant in all fifty states.
IF anything it supports the premise that the AM people need to get the BOs out of office Sooner rather than later. Class Action lawsuits against the federal agencies may also be in order...failure to enforce etc.
OTOH the section that was sent back to the lower court apparently also contains wording that would make enforcement for each state easier and can be used as a guide for ALL states....A step forward.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.