9th Circuirt denies Arizona’s expedited appeal
I know, I know. What else did you expect from the 9th Circuit? (h/t Tammy Bruce)
Via Business Week:
Arizona’s appeal of a federal court ruling that blocks the central provisions of a state law requiring police to determine the immigration status of people stopped for questioning was set for November.
The U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco today denied Arizona Governor Jan Brewer’s bid for an expedited hearing in September. State lawyers argued the earlier date was needed because parts of the law barred by the lower court addressed “serious criminal, environmental and economic problems” due to ineffective federal enforcement of immigration laws.
The Justice Department, which sued to block Arizona’s law, said the timetable proposed by the state would give it only two weeks to respond to briefs and not the four weeks allowed by court rules.
The schedule from here on out:
Arizona’s opening brief in the appeal is due Aug. 26, the government’s brief is due 28 days after the state’s, and no extensions will be granted unless there are “extraordinary and compelling circumstances,” the appeals court ruled. The court ordered its clerk’s office to schedule the hearing during the week of Nov. 1.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Immigration
Conservatives4Palin
» Even Liberal Ben Smith from Politico Continues to Call the Vanity Fair Hit Piece a Lie
Ed Driscoll
» ‘October Surprises, Maybe Every Day and All Day’Legal Insurrection
» Democrats Approach The Tipping PointPundit & Pundette
» Let them eat cake locavoresConservatives4Palin
» Real Source Debunks Vanity Fair's Ghost SourcesLegal Insurrection
» What Does The "Israel Lobby" Have To Do With The Discovery Channel Hostage Taking?
Too bad we can’t charge the entire 9th Circuit with murder one for the number that will die in the state of AZ between now and their magic carpet date.
Legal Insurrection makes an excellent point: if the time line of the 9th Circuit Court (of overturned) or Appeals is followed, this case will be argued on the week of Nov. 1.
That is priceless. Eventually, a synapse is going to fire in some above average Democrat and they will realize this. This, plus Rangel, should make for a very interesting election.
Yep, that’s right in the article quoted above.
No matter if it’s the 9th circuit or the Supreme Court, whatever the worst possible outcome for this case is, it’s the one we will get.
And one thing that should always be kept in mind is that the administration’s challenge rests solely on congressional preemption. That means that Congress can effectively overturn a court decision against the state by explicitly allowing states to pass laws like SB 1070. If Republicans make that part of their platform, that could only boost their chances of winning elections in November.
I donated $ to the State of Arizona today to help with their legal fees. It’s
http://www.keepazsafe.com
This isn’t just Arizona’s problem. We are fighting for our sovereignty and we must stop this invasion or our children and grandchildren are going to pay the ultimate price.
So, now we got to wait till November for the 9th circus, based in a sanctuary city, to decide on the appeal of a temporary injunction.
I wonder if Federal Judge Bolton will wait until AFTER the appeal of the temporary injunction is heard, and ruled on, BEFORE setting a date for the actual trial?
Is this a rhetorical question?
They sent it to the 9th Circus as a formality. It will go to the Supreme Court and they will restore the original language and we will start turning the tide on Mexico dictating our immigration policies. Birthright citizenship is after that. We will control our borders and destroy the race card once and for all in the process.
Enjoy your stay, Mexican nationals. Take in all the sites. You’ll be leaving soon.
America is a COUNTRY NOT a CONTINENT.
GO HOME!
Well now, the president wants to give rights to illegals, add to that congress and now the judiciary. All we get is to pick up the tab. We are not getting our money’s worth.
I just read an interesting piece, who really has jurisdiction over a case when a State is involved?
Illegal Immigration needs to be a top issue in the 2010 elections.
Every single candidate for local, state or federal offices should be asked to explain their positions on ILLEGAL immigration at every single campaign stop.
And the questions should be very specific. What EXACTLY are they going to do to stop ILLEGAL immigration?
I don’t know this for a fact…..but part of the “smart-side” of my brain believes that Judge Bolton was “contacted” by someone in the BHO admin prior to her decision.
There is no way that something as big as this will not have some form of Chicago-Style intervention.
That’s all the open borders crowd wants: tie it up in court long enough to allow the illegals to vote in November. Admit it, are any of us going to do anything about it? It’s
ChinatownChicago.You say you want a revolution?
The Cubs haven’t won a World Series in over 100 years and they failed to get the Olympic games. Let’s make sure Chicago fails to impose communism on America.
One of my favorite Ralph Waldo Emerson quotes:
Why do we troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan when our liberties are being taken from us right here at home by our entrenched criminal class of elected and appointed weasels?
Phil
We all know that our road to destruction lies in illegal immigration. Yet, our elected will gladly lead us down that path to ensure they stay where they want to be – sitting at the head of the table and telling us when it’s time to eat, or simply excuse ourselves from the table.
we can do one thing-stop electing RINOS like mccain (lcop) —
C-CS
That’s okay. It keeps the topic out in public view for a longer period bringing it even closer to November.
Agreed, Waterboyz, BHO really DID NOT really try to keep his offshore oil drilling mmoratorium, now did he?…it was just a bone for the environitwits, and the gulf states aren’t going to vote for him anyway so he threw Salazar’s reputation under the bus.
Keeping Illegals of Mexican Nationality, and then those of other nationalities from crony capitalist and socialist states(it won’t just stop with Mexicans) is the only realistic way to keep teh dems in power long-term.
We CAN, in the court of public opinion. We can keep track and publicize every crime and death and blame the 9th circuit and the Obama administration, loudly and repeatedly. Remind all Americans that they wouldnt have happened if not for Obama and the liberal 9th circus.
What the heck is Arizona doing? Has AZ read this section?
GO DIRECTLY TO SCOTUS. DO NOT PASS GO!!
Screw Judge Bolton. Screw Holder. Screw 9th Circuit.
READ IT HERE.
I agree with #10 & #22. This just makes common sense. Of course the States have EQUAL Constitutional power with the Executive, Legislative, & Judicial Branches.
The States were not given secondary status, and local judges were not given power over the States. A local “district” judge or 9th circuit court judges have no jurisdiction over a State, or over lawfully enacted legislation by that State’s Legislature.
George Bush appealed directly to the Supreme Court in the 2000 election because it was a State v. Fed issue, & the Supremes agreed to hear the case.
This is a Fed v. State issue. AZ needs to play hardball, just like GW did & go directly to the Supremes.
Wow. that’s a LOT faster than the 9th Circuit typically takes to brief and hear an appeal of a deportation order from an illegal alien fighting deportation.
Also, Per the Constitutional reference link in #10
The States that are suing the Feds on the Constitutionality of the Health Care mandate, should also be going directly to the Supreme Court. Local and District and Circuit Courts have NO jurisdiction to hear the health care arguments of the States vs. the Feds.
Guess GW was pretty smart after all.
So why doesn’t the Arizona Governor order 287-G enforcement everywhere right now?
ONLY the US Supreme Court has Constitutional Authority to Conduct the Trial
By Publius Huldah Thursday, July 29, 2010
Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.
Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction…
“Original” jurisdiction means the power to conduct the “trial” of the case (as opposed to hearing an appeal from the judgment of a lower court). You all know quite well what a “trial” is – you see them all the time on TV shows: Perry Mason, Boston Legal, The Good Wife, etc. Witnesses testify and are cross-examined, etc.
The style of the Arizona case shows quite clearly that the named defendants are:
State of Arizona; and Janice K. Brewer,
Governor of the State of Arizona, in her
Official Capacity, Defendants.
Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you
See where it says, “State of Arizona”? And “Janice K. Brewer, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her official Capacity”? THAT (plus Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2) is what gives the US Supreme Court “original Jurisdiction”, i.e., jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case. THAT is what strips the federal district court of any jurisdiction whatsoever to hear this case. Judge Susan R. Bolton has no more authority to preside over this case than do you (unless you are a US Supreme Court justice).
In Federalist No. 81 (13th para), Alexander Hamilton commented on this exact provision of Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2:
…Let us now examine in what manner the judicial authority is to be distributed between the supreme and the inferior courts of the Union. The Supreme Court is to be invested with original jurisdiction, only “in cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which A STATE shall be a party.” Public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns. All questions in which they are concerned are so directly connected with the public peace, that, as well for the preservation of this, as out of respect to the sovereignties they represent, it is both expedient and proper that such questions should be submitted in the first instance to the highest judicatory of the nation. Though consuls have not in strictness a diplomatic character, yet as they are the public agents of the nations to which they belong, the same observation is in a great measure applicable to them. In cases in which a State might happen to be a party, it would ill suit its dignity to be turned over to an inferior tribunal….[boldface added, caps in original]
Yet Attorney General Eric Holder filed the case in a court which is specifically stripped of jurisdiction to hear it!
So! Counsel for the State of Arizona should consider:
1. File a Petition for Removal before federal district court Judge Susan R. Bolton demanding that the case be removed to the Supreme Court on the ground that under Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2, US Constitution, only the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to conduct the trial of this case.
2. If Judge Bolton denies the Petition for Removal, file a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the Supreme Court asking that court to order Judge Bolton to transfer the case to the Supreme Court.
A Petition for Writ of Mandamus is an old common-law “extraordinary writ”: It asks a court to ORDER a lower court or other public official to something which it is its duty to do. In Kerr v. US District Court for Northern District of California (1976), the Supreme Court said, respecting the propriety of issuing writs of mandamus:
….the fact still remains that “only exceptional circumstances amounting to a judicial ‘usurpation of power’ will justify the invocation of this extraordinary remedy.”…(para 13)
When a federal district court judge presides over a case which the Constitution specifically prohibits her from hearing, and even issues a ruling enjoining the enforcement of a State Law, then that federal district court judge usurps power. She is specifically stripped – by Art. III, Sec. 2, clause 2 – of jurisdiction to preside over the case against the STATE of Arizona and against THE GOVERNOR of the STATE of Arizona.
For procedures for filing the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, see Supreme Court Rule 20.
Article IV, Sec. 4, requires the federal government to protect each of the States against invasion.Not only is the Obama regime refusing to perform this specific Constitutional duty – it seeks to prohibit the Sovereign STATE of Arizona from defending itself! This lawlessness on the part of the Obama regime is unmatched in the history of Our Country.
OK, counselors – Go for it! PH
November 1?
I have no problem with that, perfect timing.
This is going to hit the headlines again just before the election.
you know it really makes no difference what the court ultimately decides…even if the law is ruled ‘constitutional’ by our judicial overlords…
the REGIME will just take the illegals given to them by AZ and release them…they won’t deport them.
Safe travels, let them know we support them and are praying for all the good people of AZ.
To all the people trying to make some Article III, Section 2 argument go back to the other thread on this and look at some of the sources I cited.
ORIGINAL jurisdiction is not the same as EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction.
Congress has lawfully conferred on the district courts the power to hear these cases. And the Supreme Court agrees.
Does Obama really want to stretch this out right into the 2012 election?
Boers v. Preston, 111 U.S. 252 (1884)
Same theory would apply here.
You’re correct. There is a difference btwn the original and exclusive jurisdiction. Considering congress controls the federal courts. My bad
When I see people like JD Haynesworth losing to McCain in polling, I know there is no true, large contigent of people available to take America back. The left has succeeded in shifting the political spectrum to the left, so that now the two political forces in your country are just the hard left and the soft left. Just like England and Canada.
I will give you an example of how this affects the mindset of voters.
When I was younger, my dad used to work about 60 – 80 hours a week driving a truck. He would have approximately 45% of his paycheck taxed by the government, and then he would have to pay property tax and other taxes afterwards. He would always complain about how he was working for the benefit of the government moreso than himself.
If you were to meet him now though, he is much different. Today, he sings the virtues of government programs and spending. What has happened is that the government has taken so much from him for so long, that firstly, he doesn’t have the nest egg he otherwise would and therefore somewhat depends on the government for his retirement income, and secondly, his mindset has been broken and molded to accepted larger government because he has been subjected to it for so long.
This is what is developing in America and will continue down the road. When the federal government takes over health care, more people will receive health care under a universal system. Hence, more people will accept higher taxes because they will have been moved to accepting the higher government involvement in their lives. The cycle will continue and ‘soft’ communism will be inevitable in America.
123upnorth: Your points are quite well taken and of concern. I know that the trends are negative but I also know as Thatcher once said you eventually run out of other people’s money. What will happen is a form of bankruptcy leaving what I call a grey and lifeless country not a colorful and vibrant country.
its already here…we’re a fascist state already…the REGIME controls every aspect of financial life in this country. along with the car companies, the banks, the insurance industry, wall street…mortgages, student loans…etc…
The 9th Circus, what a surprise, dragging their feet. Actually, this will make it better for the November elections.
See ya Dems. And Maxine, don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Same goes for Rangel, Conyers, etc.
Now WE get a chance to drain the swamp since Nancy couldn’t find the time to do it herself.
“When I see people like JD Haynesworth losing to McCain in polling, I know there is no true, large contigent of people available to take America back.”
Or as I’ve previously noted maybe JD is not the Godsend some of you folks seem to think he is. Just because he is not-McCain does not mean he is a good candidate. IF JD was a great conservative candidate and was the Senator we are all looking for and THEN folks were voting for McCain, ok, you’d have a point.
That is not the case.
JD has issues too.
JD could have addressed those issues intelligently and honestly. He has not, at least not yet. I just now saw a series of his first television commercials. Just NOW. McCain has been killing him for months.
Has anyone studied The Supremacy Clause?
Do you think this Clause prevents Arizona from doing this?
I’m all for Arizona in this case. But I think it’s probably a correct ruling. I don’t like the ruling, but I think it’s correct.
In this case, Arizona has made it a state crime to violate Federal law.
It will be interesting to see where this leads.
In 1939 Pennsylvania tried to find Nazis, and the Supreme Court ruled this was un constitutional because this was Federal law, and states cant do this.
It will be interesting to say the least.
“Headed to Phoenix”
Hot, humid and raining……
Judge Suzy-Q’s ruling:
a.) assumes Az police cannot walk and chew gum at the same time, that they lack acumen and common sense to determine the legal citizenship status of rightfully detained persons;
b.) suggests that the judge has no or little understanding of police work and “just cause” in detaining and questioning potential suspects;
c.) epitomizes the pitfalls and long-term ramifications of retaining partisan judges appointed by Democrat presidents; they’re never properly vetted;
d.) will eventually be overturned and SB 1070 vindicated and observed as law throughout the nation, once the SCOTUS steps up to the plate in a truly objective manner.
Mr. Rip Van Winkle I presume? Have you read the polls? Ever heard of the Tea Party? The failure of AZ Republicans to oust McCain is not representative of what conservatives, or Americans “across the spectrum” think. Fewer than 20% of Americans are liberal. Forty percent describe themselves as conservative and much of the rest are leaning conservative. More than ever, America is a right-leaning country. It’s just that we now have a one-party ruling class that has corrupted the democratic processes to their own ends and we are becoming increasingly powerless to do anything about it.
Arizona for instance. The reason Arizona is the major border entry point for illegal immigrants and drugs is because they live in a fools paradise. While CA, and to some extent TX, were building effective border security, AZ slept. The open-borders regime is headquartered in Houston (Bracewell-Giuliani for instance) while the key politicians have found safe haven in AZ (McCain, Kyl and Napolitano).
Yet McCain is going to get re-nominated by Republicans? The thing that would make me not vote for Hayworth is if he endorsed McCain. Anything short of that is not “shooting himself in the foot”. That Intrade has McCain’s chances of winning at 90% says more about how stupid and out of touch AZ Republicans are than the rest of the country.
What we are witnessing is how corrupted the Republicans who represent the “red states” truly are. The GOP is doing to those states exactly what they did to CA. It wasn’t us voters who chose this path, it was our entrenched criminal class.
Chap, no doubt it will end up in the Supreme Court anyway. Seams like all this District and 9th Court stuff is just a waste of time and the taxpayers money.
Ditto that BUT, my 87 yr old father (who never worked for the gov’t except WW2 and is now on SS w/no pension) held his nose and voted for McCain. He’ll vote against BHO in 2012 too. We all have to hang in there.
Back to the original issue:
Kris Kobach helped write the Arizona Law. He’s a constitutional attorney in KS and is running for Secretary of State there. The Nov.1 timing of the hearing w/prior prep required will be hard on him as I’m sure he will be involved. Follow this guy and $upport him if you can, please.
Some reasonable thinking partisan conservatives, (e.g. Levin, Hinderaker and A. McCarthy) have knocked Bolton’s ruling out of the park as majority part’s supposition and speculation. It was meant to buy time for the regime to try and process amnesty around Congress through the immigration bureaucracy as some kind of de facto deal. No matter. The delay plays in favor of the conservative electorate— if we can swing the mid-terms and begin investigations into the regimes many pecadilloes, including the SB 1070 suit, we can make mincemeat out of the Dems for years to come.
On a related note, I am wondering how Americans feel about all the retirement deals being shopped to and bought by anxious Baby Boomers who are retiring in Mexico. It all appears legal and such, with Americans abiding by Mexican laws etc.
Does it foreshadow an American annexation of Mexico? Is that what this is all about? Would this put the Dems in power perpetually? A default political consequence? Would annexed Mexicans align across conventional US political party lines?
Just thinking out loud regarding a situation that is being hidden behind the “immigration” debate, of which this is neither given the illegal invasion and the political court’s ruling.
Bear1909 out.
Bear, reminds me of a conversation I had with a West German just before the wall came down. He wasn’t too keen on it coming down.
I’m sure the InJustice Dept. is going to need the full 4 weeks to fabricate a reason as to why the hell they’re attempting to stop Arizona from doing a job that in fact, they themselves should have been doing in the first place.
West Germans’ concerns were more than justified. Absorbing East Germany has given them a major case of indigestion.
Yep. It will be interesting to see how all this illegal alien stuff pans out. We have to keep our ‘guardia’ up.
The tyranny of our Federal Judiciary, and Federal government. Our lives are being utterly controlled by the Federal government. When do Americans reach the breaking point?
How much more of this occurs before the issue of secession comes up?
As a Texan, just wonderin.
never, we’re not our grandparents thats for sure.
More likely
My next purchase for when I go to the AZ border region again: Springfield Armory’s M1A.
“The reason Arizona is the major border entry point for illegal immigrants and drugs is because they live in a fools paradise. While CA, and to some extent TX, were building effective border security, AZ slept.”
Gosh Phil can you get something more wrong than that?
What a crock.
California border is secure because California secured it? And beyond that, California’s border is secure? Really? Texas is secure?
9th circuit court announced it’s decision today, and apologised for the delay due to Mr. Soros having to complete his golf game before considering the appeal.
The fact that the jurisdiction of the 9th circus remains so large is another failure of the GOP Congresses.