Judge Rules Injunction against SB 1070


I shouldn’t have been surprised. And yet I was when around lunch time I opened the Drudge Report to discover that Federal Judge Susan Bolton had indeed issued an injunction against AZ’s SB 1070 that essentially guts it of any power…  That is to say, she disallowed the part where officers are required/allowed to determine the status of any whom they arrest in conjunction with another crime, should they have sufficient justification to think they might be here illegally.

Her argument? It would inconvenience some of those legally here if they didn’t have their documentation with them, and had to wait around while officers checked on their status after being arrested. 

Secondly, she claimed federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement  resources would be completely overwhelmed, unable to handle the vast numbers of inquiries that were sure to come their way, and leaving their other responsibilities unattended to because of the diversion of their workers.

 Thirdly, she ruled that while Arizona’s law mirror’s federal law, it nevertheless pre-empts it because Arizona has altered the penalties to be levied on those found guilty.  That’s true. Arizona did alter the penalties — SB 1070 penalties are reduced from what the federal law stipulates. More to the point, though, is the fact that this whole part of her argument is a distortion. It’s not that our law would pre-empt federal law, but that it would pre-empt the federal government’s policy regarding that law.  That is, their policy of not enforcing it.

Heather MacDonald at NRO’s The Corner gives a brief, incisive (some say biting) critique of the ruling HERE (“What Judge Bolton’s Injunction Doesn’t Say”).

Also at NRO, Andy McCarthy gives his take, highlighting Bolton’s misapplication of the ruling in a previous court case, and the fact she’s ignored other case precedents that apply directly. One of which, Plyler v. Doe (1982), went to the Supreme Court, which ruled, “Despite the exclusive federal control of this Nation’s borders, we cannot conclude that the States are without power to deter the influx of persons entering the United States against federal law, and whose numbers might have a discernible impact on traditional state concerns. [Emphasis added.]” You can read his entire review HERE.

Meanwhile, the busload of SEIU people who came from LA to protest the law are now celebrating, as are the locals who were already threatening to block government buildings in Phoenix and dare authorities to ask about their immigration status. Then there were the people in Mexico City, about 100 of them hanging out near the US Embassy cheering and chanting,  “Migrants, hang on, the people are rising up!”  What in the world is that supposed to mean?


5 thoughts on “Judge Rules Injunction against SB 1070

  1. Pingback: World Wide News Flash

  2. Donna Hagan

    “What in the world is that supposed to mean?” That their arrogance has been reinforced. Open the floodgates and let the takers in. It’s a good thing Col. Thieme is with the Lord know – can just imagine the righteous indignation and words of wit and wisdom he’d have for this situation, not to mention all of the insanity taking place. Although he never claimed to be a prophet (since the gift of prophecy is not for the Church Age) listening to some of his older messages, with his historical genius is amazing – so many things he warned about are happening. I pray for Arizona and the good people of Arizona. The Battle is the Lord’s and he’s placed some tough people like your Governor Jan Brewer in a position of leadership. I’m sure you know this is ALL about politics – period. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any individuals’ protection or freedom. It’s about getting the Latino vote. Sadly not even the Republican congress, when the majority, ever dealt with this. Our federal government is totally disengaged from the will of the people and it’s not sudden though definitely accelerated through the socialistic majority up there.

  3. Gayle Coble

    As the nation of Rome grew and prospered they too let the “European Ramble” into their nation. After all there were jobs that the good Roman citizens, like many good American citizens simply do not want. Now if you believe that is true, stop and watch Mike Rowe’s “Dirty Jobs” on the Discovery channel. All of these excuses, like all of Judge Bolton’s summaries are not based in fact or in law. Our nation has a great many federal judges who are not make their decisions by the law, but are setting policy. No surprise, because as Donna stated from the Colonel’s teachings, we know that historical trends are always repeated. Nothing is new under the sun. Solomon knew! Man’s will is not God’s will. So as the believer goes…so goes the nation. We as a nation are just going down the tubes quicker than SPQR.

  4. M

    I am actually delighted by Judge Bolton’s ruling.

    Myself, I am a legal immigrant who’s lived in the US for 25+ years. I’ve obtained my American citizienship and I’m currently working on my second master’s degree from University of Arizona, so yes, I live in Arizona, same as you (although in the Phoenix area, not Tucson).

    Let me clarify.

    I absolutely agree that we must find ways to limit illegal immigration. As you’ve stated, it drains our state’s financial resources, and I have seen the consequences, same as you. However, I find the obvious (as well as subtle) racism horrific. I have heard too many SB 1070 supporters glorifying their racist comments. Some are smarter about it, and cloak their racism under a guise of “concerned citizenship.”

    I am not saying that you are one of them – indeed, I don’t think you are! – but the fact remains that you are white. I am not Hispanic, myself, but I have experienced racism far too often, and I am keenly aware that there is racism here in Arizona since I’ve experienced it here as well as my family members.

    Unless you are a minority, you cannot say that you understand the racism firsthand. It is degrading as well as crushing.

    Now, my hope is that *both* sides will come to a reasonable compromise – a reasonable way to counter illegal immigration – without racist over/undertones.

    Only then will it have my full support.

    1. karenhancock

      Thanks for reading the blog and commenting, aelinor. As you might expect, I disagree with your viewpoint. You do realize, I hope, that your statement “Unless you are a minority, you cannot say that you understand the racism firsthand” is itself a racist statement, since in it you are making an issue of my race in your assessment of my ability to understand something…

      Well, I see that my response to you is long enough, it ought to be a blog post. So that’s what I will do with it. Thanks again for the comment!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.