Question:
When Fornicalia decides it wants to go above and beyond the fed in terms of, for example, environmental laws, it is embraced.
When Arizona decides it wants to go above and beyond the fed in terms of, for example, immigration laws, it is excoriated and officially struck down by the most supreme court of the land.
How does that equate?
Finally, has anyone read the dissent proffered by Antonin Scalia in re Arizona v United States?
Briefly:
Arizona bears the brunt of the country’s illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem,and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so. Thousands of Arizona’s estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from enforcement, and will be able to compete openly with Arizona citizens for employment.
Amazing that a federal employee actually understands the severe straits that merely one state finds itself encountering with regard to illegal immigrants.
BZ
