The Ruling: Three days before the controversial ACA(Obamacare) ruling, another SCOTUS ruling managed to slip under the radar. The ruling was issued in regards to a new Arizona immigration law. Some portions were ruled unconstitutional while the main controversial potion was ruled constitutional. The portion of the law still standing, required “that police, while enforcing other laws, question people’s immigration status if officers have reasonable suspicion they’re in the country illegally.” The constitutional ruling was unanimous meaning liberal and conservative justices BOTH agreed Arizona was well within the constitution when crafting thispart of the law, No liberal-conservative divide here.
SCOTUS is ignored: If the main portion of the law is constitutional then why is Pres. Obama impeding it. Could it be linked to his recent attempt to gain Latino votes from his Executive pardon of illegal immigrants born in the United States. Don’t think he’d pardon illegal immigrants? Homeland Security says “those who demonstrate that they meet the criteria will be eligible to receive deferred action for a period of two years”. What else is a deferred action towards a crime, if not a pardon? How is the president impeding the law and thereby ignoring SCOTUS? After all by granting deffered action the president is refusing to enforce constitutional immigration laws. Even Justice Scalia commented on the ineffective enforcement of the president, by stating “ to say that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the president declines to enforce boggles the mind.” Currently the estimated number of illegal immigrants is between 7-20 million. After the presidents announcement of deferred action, we can only expect the numbers of couples sneaking across our border to have kids in the U.S. to increase, further fueling Arizona’s immigrant problem.
My Opinion: The President isn’t adhering to the 10th ammendment and hes acting like a child because the supreme court ot the U.S. did not say what he wanted to hear. The president demonstrated his anger towards SCOTUS and Arizona by setting up a “a hotline for the public to report potential civil rights concerns” AKA a profiling hotline for illegals provided on the tax payers dime. Shortly after the ruling (under the jurisdiction of the president) ICE stopped returning calls to Arizona in which Arizona officers resquested access to the federals database so they could verify their suspects legal status. “The impact (of the law) in Arizona in the short term is pretty insignificant, because it’s pretty clear that ICE isn’t going to respond to these calls.” So with the presidents enforcement agencies not returning the calls made by Arizona law enforcement but being willing to take the calls of illegal immigrants, what other word could describe this behavior but childish. As for civil rights violations or constitutionality, I’m not buying it. The law states the officers must first be enforcing other laws, then if they have reasonable suspicion they may inquire about the suspects legal status.
Example: A Latino man runs a red light, an officer pulls the man over. While the man is stopped the officer walks up an asks for the mans license and registration. The man hands his license but says “yo no tango registration”, for which the officer would have a reasonable suspicion as to the man legal status not because of skin color but rather that he had not registration and couldn’t obey the driving law nor speak English.
This to me means that officers should do what they’ve always done, investigate suspects thoroughly using reasonable suspicion and probable cause, thereby avoiding civil rights violations.
By: Milton L. Jefferson
A Contributor of The Constitutional Knight