Supreme Court upholds Arizona illegal immigration sanctions
A very significant ruling from the high court today on the constitutionality of Arizona’s law imposing sanctions on businesses that hire illegal aliens. This is not SB1070 signed by GOP Gov. Jan Brewer, but an earlier law passed by, ahem, then-Democrat Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano — who, of course, now serves in an administration using the same preemption argument against SB01070 that the court just rejected in the business sanctions case.
Take heed, Arizona-bashers and Holder DOJ:
The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld an Arizona law that imposes sanctions against businesses that hire illegal immigrants.
The court, on a 5-3 vote, said federal immigration law does not bar Arizona from suspending or revoking the licenses of businesses that employ unauthorized aliens.
“Because we conclude that the state’s licensing provisions fall squarely within the federal statute’s savings clause and that the Arizona regulation does not otherwise conflict with federal law, we hold that the Arizona law is not preempted,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in a 27-page opinion.
Then-Gov. Janet Napolitano signed the Arizona law in 2007, saying that while immigration is a federal responsibility, Arizona had been forced to deal with the issue because the demand for cheap, undocumented labor in the state was contributing to illegal immigration.
Numerous organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce, argued the state’s law was preempted by the federal Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which forbids states from imposing sanctions for hiring illegal immigrants. But that law exempts “licensing and similar laws,” and a key issue in the case was whether Arizona’s law fell under that exemption.
The open-borders Chamber of Commerce strikes out again.
The win bolsters 1070 co-author Kris Kobach’s case that the Obama DOJ will lose on preemption.
NLJ: How did you ensure that S.B. 1070 conforms with federal pre-emption doctrine, which is likely to be the major basis for challenging the law?
KK: The provision of the law that many have focused on is the one makes it a misdemeanor for an alien to fail to carry registration documents on his person. They fail to mention that an individual is only guilty if he is in violation of 8 USC sec 1304(a) or 8 USC 1306(e). Those provisions have been around since 1940, making it a crime to fail to register or carry certain documents. The state statue literally refers to those federal statutes. A person can only be guilty under the state statute if he is guilty under the federal statute.
The principle that protects the Arizona law is the legal principle of concurrent enforcement. This has been recognized by several courts, including the 9th Circuit. It holds that a law is not conflict-preempted if the state law prohibits the same behavior that is already prohibited by federal law. Similarly, if a state officer acts in a way to assist the federal government in that action, he concurrently enforces what is already prohibited under federal law.
That principle guides any interpretation of S.B. 1070.
The controlling Supreme Court precedent is 1976′s De Canas v. Bica. In that case, the Supreme Court recognized states may enact legislation to discourage illegal immigration within their jurisdictions. The mere fact that a state law concerns illegal immigration or affects immigration in some way does not render it pre-empted.
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.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
GOP Texas primary fight: Desperate Dewhurst slimes conservative challenger Ted Cruz
May 25, 2012 07:31 PM by Michelle Malkin
4 CommentsFast and Furious showdown: Holder/Obama defend bloody culture of contempt; Update: Fortress Holder, Stonewall City; vid clips added, Dems advise, “Don’t answer”
February 2, 2012 09:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
158 CommentsObama and Jan Brewer Have Words on Airport Tarmac; Update: Brewer Book Sales Skyrocket
January 25, 2012 09:54 PM by Doug Powers
165 Comments
Gingrich channels open-borders SEIU; Rubio rebukes; Update:Newt retreats
January 25, 2012 10:56 AM by Michelle Malkin
155 Comments
Obama heads to Disney World to push looser visa policies
January 17, 2012 01:14 PM by Michelle Malkin
95 Comments
Obama’s “Razist” Lobbyist Moves Up
January 13, 2012 06:29 AM by Michelle Malkin
233 CommentsThe Year in Obama Scandals — and Scandal Deniers
December 28, 2011 12:04 PM by Michelle Malkin
122 Comments
The murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry: One year ago today
December 14, 2011 11:11 AM by Michelle Malkin
70 Comments
Supreme Court to Decide Arizona Immigration Law
December 12, 2011 01:18 PM by Doug Powers
57 Comments
Categories: Immigration
Babalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the YearRedstate
» Kimberlin’s Associates Caught on Tape?
SCOTUS upholds the constitution. Amazing!
At least one branch of the government still does.
Until OweBowMao puts more cronies on the bench.
Public Schools Must Serve All Comers
Editorial in today’s Oklahoman. The paper continues to stagger to the left.
Greetings ITRP, where you been? Have you seen Miss Tickly’s last post?
I met Richardson at a private party when he was trying to get votes in 07. I wasn’t impressed.
Greetings ITRP, where you been? Have you seen Miss Tickly’s last post?
I met Richardson at a private party when he was trying to get votes in 07. I wasn’t impressed.
{correcting a typo and repeating after the 100 comment break..}
Anyone who has legally started a new job since 1986 is familiar with this law and its requirements:
Note that there are NO EXCEPTIONS.
Not even the President of the United States is exempt from this law.
So, where is Obama’s Form I-9 and accompanying “Acceptable Documentation”?
Of the so-called “documentation” that has been released to the U.S. electorate, NONE of it (URLs, JPGs, and PDFs) qualifies as “Acceptable Documentation” for a Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.
If it’s not acceptable by the standards of a Form I-9, it’s not acceptable, period.
You could not get a job at McDonald’s by simply providing a URL to JPG images or PDFs. You would have to provide the hard copy documentation for inspection.
So tell me, which members of Congress have honored their sworn oath to support and defend the Constitution (including Section 3 of the 20th Amendment, which gives them the authority and obligation to ensure that hte President and Vice-President have qualified) and have personally inspected the hard copy birth certificate under seal from the State of Hawaii?
{Crickets}
Combine the legal requirements of:
1) Article II Section 1 of the United States Constitution
2) Section 3 of the 20th Amendment to the United States Constitution
3) The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986:
… and it is clear that Obama and Biden are legally required to produce hard copy documentation of not only their
but also their
And Congress has the Constitutional responsibility to ensure that the President and Vice President have qualified.
That’s what drove Kipling almost blind…
He didn’t “love” it, however. He was driven to attempt suicide as a child, (by people I would consider leftists).
He recounted it in his horror story, “Baa Baa Black Sheep”.
That it’s by such a slim majority (if you count the recused Kagan), is a travesty. The 4 Liberal justices that can smell new rights from the ‘emanations’ of ‘penumbra’ of the Constitution make me puke.
On May 26th, 2011 at 3:29 pm, Ray said:
Thanks for asking. I’ve been quite active with business and family matters.
Yes.
I suspect she is going to recuse herself on the cases she knows is defeated. Let’s wait and see what she does if her vote is needed to pass legislation she should resend herself from.
Seriously, which member(s) of Congress will enforce the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 upon Obama and Biden?
Or, are we to pretend that Obama and Biden are above the law?!?
Hope both are doing very well. Glad to see you back.
Seems like most here have accepted that we are stuck with Barry when the goods just keep stacking up. Can’t figure….
Or, are we to pretend that Obama and Biden are above the law?!?
Ask Chandra Levy.
Everyone but you, me, BOB, Ray, Hiraghm and a few others are pretending native born is the same as natural born. They are also pretending the PDFs, JPEGs, etc, are valid. It’s apparently too much trouble to uphold the Constitution.
It will be interesting to see the reaction to this subpoena.
Judge Obama
Well, that’s what they’ve been pretending. We’re supposed to go along with them. So far the GOP hasn’t really disappointed them in that.
The page does not load when you click on the link. However that is all the proof liberals need. Who need proof when the pretender in chief can ignore any law he wish to push his agenda.
I posted this two days ago and it never drew a comment. ????
There is a clean copy of the subpoena over at the Post and Email, I think.
Sorry, here is the subpoena http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/“>
10th Amendment, baby! States Rights.
There have been some great comedy duos. Laurel and Hardy,Abbott and Costello,Amos and Andy,Obama and Biden.
Laughing at the last duo’s humor is like giving sympathy to the devil.
This is a good read
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36911
Sadly, I guess we all followed Obama’s example and just ignored it.
Paratus was it you that told me to check out Pat Travers?
because I’ve accused of the same thing
s/b I’ve been accused…
On May 26th, 2011 at 4:09 pm, torpedoman2002 said:
The link seems to be working now, and I also see that others have given alternative links. I also saved a copy and uploaded it to my blog.
For those who are not aware of this, it is part of the case regarding Obama’s potentially fraudulent use of a Connecticut-issued Social Security Number. Orly appears to have been granted a potentially significant subpoena.
It will be interesting to see the reaction and response of the Hawaii Department of Health to this D.C. District Court subpoena requiring Loretta Fuddy on June 27th, 2011 at 10:00 am to:
If the documentation is all legitimate, there should be no reason to resist this subpoena.
But if the documentation is fraudulent, this takes it up a notch…
forcing Fuddy to either enter a forged document into a D.C. District Court case, or face contempt of Court.
she didn’t write it and was just conservative enough to survive in office. Once she know she was leaving she became veto happy and so became known as J-No.
A “Forty” is a 40 oz. bottle of beer … in case no one else answered this yet … I didn’t check the whole thread.
They are especially popular in the “hood”.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Everybody’s pretending that images on the internet and some semantic acrobatics have changed the Constitution from natural born to native born.
The images, if of genuine documents, prove he is ineligible.
The precedent has been set.
Virginia Patriot: have you read Miss Tickly’s final post at http://obamasgarden.wordpress.com/
Green eyed Lady: That was me. Travers does a great version of “Green Eyed Lady”
No I hadn’t Ray, thanks for the link.
Well, as a resident of the fine state of Arizona I’m glad to see the immigration law upheld! And I’m tired of being told I’m a racist because I don’t want people in my “house” that weren’t invited in! Or rather, were invited in by somebody down the street–which is what employers are doing when they hire illegals. J-No did have a couple of lucid moments, way back in the far distant past!
Everybody should check out Ray’s link above. The effort to squash Constitutionalists is succeeding. We’re losing our country.
I think Miss Tickly’s experience was had by many. It would sure explain the people who joined the Alinsky against people questioning The Usurper that one would normally think would be on our side.
Thought so….thanks!
ahh if your gonna cover,kill it ,Travers killed it!!
Hi VP
Pretty disgusting, huh?
Miss Tickly was a regular poster at Hillbuzz for years. When she all of a sudden went silent, I figured she had been contacted to back off.
If I were Miss Tickly,and I don’t say this lightly,she needs to back off. She’s been contacted by someone that “could” do her family harm. They would go after her family before her.
I would imagine that’s one of the reasons other bloggers haven’t pursued this.
Nah. One of the fastest motocross racers in the world happens to be black. As far as I know, he’s not a racist. Helluva nice guy too.
But if you raced Pickup trucks…. you’d not be viewed in a good light by liberals.
On May 26th, 2011 at 9:31 pm, Paratus said:
That right there is why I blog anonymously. I have a family to think about. And while my wife is an EXCELLENT shot and has hollow point ammo that she’s not afraid to use, I can’t say the same yet about my kids. I don’t need an unhinged leftist coming after my family.
And I’m still praying for Marizela to be delivered from evil and returned to her family.
While a “forty” may be a drink where you are, a “forty” or “four oh” in my “hood” is a .40 caliber handgun.
While both may knock you down when they hit you, the .40 cal is likely to keep you down. Maybe permanently if you have any handgun expertise.
Just sayin’
KP – back from the suck for some leave! Woo Hoo. I LOVE THE USA!!!!
Good to hear ITookTheRedPill like others on this site good to see you back posting.
On May 26th, 2011 at 10:08 pm, Paratus said:
Thank you, Paratus.
And thank you to each of you who welcomed me back.
I appreciate that more than you know.
Why? Because human nature is such that when people don’t like what you have to say, they tend to be fairly vocal about it, while those who like what you have to say generally keep that to themselves.
I know that I shouldn’t care what people think, one way or the other, but I do like to hear positive feedback to balance out the negative feedback.
Thanks again for making me feel like Norm walking into “Cheers”!
I know what you mean RedPill, I’ve caught my share of flak. I ignore the trolls, but when you get it from people who are normally on your side, it’s a little different.
I had to travel to and through Arizona quite a bit last year. Stopped in Tucson and got my car washed. Living in California, I was completely shocked watching Americans doing the jobs that they don’t want to do. I slyly asked a white guy who had just finished wiping down my car about it. He said it wasn’t too bad of a gig, made decent tips while he was getting his life back together (I think he probably did some time for drugs). Illegals, taking the jobs American teenagers and rehabilitated adults need.
On May 26th, 2011 at 4:03 pm, Hiraghm said:
On May 26th, 2011 at 3:37 pm, ITookTheRedPill said:
Chief Justice Barack Obama, to you. Will it be his last official act in office to name himself to be the next Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court? Somehow, it would not surprise me.