It's back to the ashes for Arizona's immigration law, which was partially blocked by federal judge Susan Bolton yesterday only hours before it was to take effect. Judge Bolton said that more time was needed for the judiciary to resolve some of the law's most contentious provisions, such as the requirement for police officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. This means that Steve Nash won't have his visa questioned if he ever gets piked up on a DWI after a rowdy Suns game and possibly get sent back to Canada. But, much more importantly, it won't subject anyone of Mexican descent to racial or ethnic profiling . . . at least for awhile.
Other delayed provisions include requiring immigrants to carry their papers and the requirement of officers to make warrantless arrests of immigrants suspected of both being and doing something illegal.
Many of these provisions smack of wrongheaded unfairness at best, a violation of the Bill of Rights at worst. Some pundits have suggested that the Obama administration's efforts to blunt or strike down this law will cause an anti-immigrant backlash against the Democrats in November, but challenging this law in Arizona is the right thing to do, and sometimes you have to buck popular opinion if you want to do the right thing. That's what leadership is all about.
Some provisions of this law - banning illegals from seeking employment in public places, for example - may have some merit, at least on face value. But while some provisions make sense and others are just flat-out dumb, the overall question is about state sovereignty, and whether or not a state can supplant or override federal law. That question was settled by President Andrew Jackson in the Nullification Crisis of 1832 (when South Carolina voided a federal tariff law) and re-affirmed by President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War - the federal government has the last word on federal issues like immigration.
So maybe Congress should pass immigration reform and resolve this once and for all before we have another Nullification Crisis.
Other delayed provisions include requiring immigrants to carry their papers and the requirement of officers to make warrantless arrests of immigrants suspected of both being and doing something illegal.
Many of these provisions smack of wrongheaded unfairness at best, a violation of the Bill of Rights at worst. Some pundits have suggested that the Obama administration's efforts to blunt or strike down this law will cause an anti-immigrant backlash against the Democrats in November, but challenging this law in Arizona is the right thing to do, and sometimes you have to buck popular opinion if you want to do the right thing. That's what leadership is all about.
Some provisions of this law - banning illegals from seeking employment in public places, for example - may have some merit, at least on face value. But while some provisions make sense and others are just flat-out dumb, the overall question is about state sovereignty, and whether or not a state can supplant or override federal law. That question was settled by President Andrew Jackson in the Nullification Crisis of 1832 (when South Carolina voided a federal tariff law) and re-affirmed by President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War - the federal government has the last word on federal issues like immigration.
So maybe Congress should pass immigration reform and resolve this once and for all before we have another Nullification Crisis.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment