We won’t know for a couple of months, but based on arguments, it seems the Supreme Court does not have the same perspective on AZ 1070 that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had. Since that court is the most overturned in history, no surprise.
Two comments were telling. One justice said, “the law allows the state to do what the Federal government refuses to do to enforce the federal government’s own law.” The other was a comment to the Obama attorney, “it appears this isn’t working, why don’t you try something else.” It didn’t go well for team Obama. But, team Obama is like the 9th Circuit court, they lose most of their lawsuits.
So a state that draws up rules to enforce a federal immigration law may have every right to draw up rules that don’t conflict with that federal law. Seems simple when you say it that way. Or, a federal government that refuses to enforce an immigration law enacted by congress and signed into law by the President, should not be surprised of a state or states begin enforcing said law if the non-enforcement is causing that state damages.
In June, with the campaign in full stride, a sitting president may be embarrassed by two Supreme Court rulings that damage that campaign. One ruling in favor of the much maligned Arizona bill 1070, and the second gutting the only accomplishment of said sitting president in three years, ObamaCare. These would be devastating to Obama’s reelection chances. Even losing one of the two would be bad.
Keep a close watch on the Supreme Court in June. They might be a big factor in the 2012 election.
