« | »

Judge Questions DOJ/ACLU AZ Arguments

From an annoyed Associated Press:

Ariz. judge raises the realities of porous border

By Jacques Billeaud And Paul Davenport, Associated Press Writers

July 22, 2010

PHOENIX – The judge who will decide whether Arizona’s new immigration law is constitutional hasn’t indicated whether she’ll put the statute on hold before it takes effect next week and had some pointed questions Thursday for challengers at two court hearings.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also went beyond dry legal analysis to point out some of the everyday realities of illegal immigration and how that applies to the new law.

Without prodding from attorneys, the judge noted that the federal government erected signs in a wilderness area south of Phoenix that warn visitors about immigrant and drug smugglers passing through public lands. She said the stash houses where smugglers hide immigrants from Mexico before bringing them into the country’s interior have become a fixture on the news in Arizona.

"You can barely go a day without a location being found in Phoenix where there are numerous people being harbored," said Bolton, who didn’t issue a ruling after the two hearings

Bolton, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton [who nominated her in 2000], repeatedly questioned Justice Department attorney Edwin Kneedler to explain how specific provisions of the law intruded on federal authority as he had argued.

"Why can’t Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered the United States illegally?" she asked.

Kneedler said the law’s requirements that law enforcement check on people’s immigration status set a mandatory policy that goes beyond what the federal government requires and would burden the federal agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries

Again, this makes no sense, given that the Arizona law actually allows the state’s law enforcement personnel to reinforce the federal authorities. So it should have the opposite effect.

Brewer, who attended one of the two hearings, said afterward that she’s confident the state will prevail, adding that Bolton "certainly understands the dangers that Arizonans face in regards to harboring illegals."

During one hearing, Bolton told lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union that she is required to consider blocking only parts of the law, not the entire statute as they had requested.

ACLU attorney Omar Jadwat said the law’s provisions are supposed to work together to achieve a goal of prodding illegal immigrants to leave the state, calling it unconstitutional and dangerous

Which, of course, is untrue. But the ACLU seldom bothers to formulate a legitimate argument. They simply count on eventually finding a compliant judge who will rule in their favor based on liberal dogma rather than the law.

Bouma told Bolton that those challenging the law haven’t demonstrated that anyone would suffer actual harm if it takes effect, and that facts — not mere speculation — must be shown.

"In Arizona we have a tremendous Hispanic heritage. To think that everybody that’s Hispanic is going to be stopped and questioned … defies reality," Bouma said. "All this hypothetical that we’re going to go out and arrest everybody that’s Hispanic, look around. That’s impossible."

As we have noted before, how could you possibly ‘profile’ in a state where half of the population could pass for Mexican?

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, July 23rd, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

8 Responses to “Judge Questions DOJ/ACLU AZ Arguments”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    For once, in a very long while, I see a small glimmer of hope that touchy-feely utopian dreams will not obliterate practical logic and good sense.

    But I am very far from confident that the correct decision will be made. For, this judge may “reach across the aisle” in McCain style, thus setting up a potential catastrophe. I like that she is asking pointed questions to the ACLU attorneys. That’s the kind of discussion that needs to happen.

    And then, even if the judge is stalwart and makes a clear, firm decision, the left will work on destroying her in other ways, relentless in their pursuit of power and evil.

    And like I said before, if the government is found to be in the wrong, which it is, then the boy who sits in the president’s chair will punish Arizona by withholding funding, and other typical gang-style tactics.

    In one sense, I look forward to it. In another, I find it quite sad that it’s even come to this.

  2. Georgfelis says:

    “…those challenging the law haven’t demonstrated that anyone would suffer actual harm if it takes effect…”

    Actually there is one group who will suffer “harm” if this law takes effect. Illegal Aliens. Just like Jaywalkers are harmed by anti-jaywalking laws, speeders are harmed by anti-speeding laws….

  3. wardmama4 says:

    Perhaps this Judge is understanding that if she sides on the side of the DOJ – she is invalidating the Federal Law? It is such a slippery slope that The Big O and his minions are on – one misstep and it is all over. Or maybe she just realizes that Illegal Aliens are not US Citizens and thus have no Constitutional Rights.

    So far – with the Klownposse in DC and the JournoLists – The Big O has been protected – but they aren’t in DC anymore.

    God Help America

    • Melly says:

      Although Judge Bolton was appointed by Bubba, it was on the recommendation of U.S. Republican Senator Jon Kyl.

  4. proreason says:

    So a judge is opposed. Why would they care about that. They’ll get another judge, or the judge will die

    L’etat n’est pas quelque judge stupide. L’etat c’est moi.

  5. GetBackJack says:

    very very not safe for work image file

    you’ve been warned


    How can there be any argument whatsoever over protecting our border from this? And these aren’t “immigrants”. These are people who are illegally gaining entry to our Nation. Let’s insist on proper language out there.

    • beautyofreason says:

      Those pictures are sobering.

      But the amnesty libwits aren’t concerned about the safety of the country. They are interested in securing special benefits predominantly Mexican people who break the law. Benjamin Franklin said, “When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” The rest of America suffers. So what.

      The minority who see immigration enforcement as racist wear rose-colored glasses. Their exposure to illegals is primarily from movies. Somewhere, they’ve seen a sob story on screen about a Mexican family with 2.1 children who just want to make it in the United States. Mom works at a hotel, dad is moving on up at a restaurant. None of them are shown living six to a room, working menial tasks, having border babies to quality for food stamps, or stealing a social security number. How dare we, the guilty rich, keep them out.

      The left chooses not to see the drugs, the kidnappings, the identity theft, the Mexican “Taliban” who leave bodies as a calling card.The sanctuary city cons see only an opportunity to secure benefits for one group – citizens be damned. They will place one race, one ethnicity, one lawbreaker on a higher tier than a citizen. They allow the superior group to siphon tax revenue and ignore the law. After all they “need” it. What’s one beheading compared to a family housed and fed?

      It’s not about helping the country. Never was.
      And for that reason they are dangerous.

    • caligirl9 says:

      Whenever I think of the consequences of sanctuary city status, I think of the Bologna family of San Francisco, half of which (a father and two sons) were shot in their car by an illegal El Salvadorean who had been arrested and served time as a juvenile, but because SF is a sanctuary city, his name was not turned over to ICE. The killer, Edwin Ramos, is an MS-13 gang-banger. MS-13 is a gang as violent as what is shown in the very graphic “work of Los Zetas” photos in the Beck link.

      I have a feeling the fools in DC won’t lift a finger until the inevitable “accidental” murder and butchering of someone on American soil. Though knowing the current climate in Washington, it will be said the poor dead guy should have known better and stayed out of the area. Kind of like the 80 miles in the Arizona desert that is infected with illegals, and ICE is in no position to clean house.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »