Disturbing: The Ninth Circuit Arizona Immigration Law Decision
Much has already been written about the April 11 decision of a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirming Judge Susan Bolton’s decision denying a preliminary injunction and holding the Arizona immigration statutes unconstitutional on the ground of federal preemption. As noted here, Judge Bea wrote a well-deserved acerbic concurring, but in reality dissenting, opinion. He quoted Lewis Carroll’s word master Humpty Dumpty and compared the court majority to him:
The majority has apparently mastered its Lewis Carroll:
“I don’t know what you mean by ‘glory,’ ” Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. “Of course you don’t –
till I tell you. I meant ‘there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!’”
“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knockdown argument,’ ” Alice objected.
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful
tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”
Judge Bea pointed out the majority’s strained interpretation of legislative intent which attributed to the Congress the intent of those later charged with enforcing federal immigration laws as though the Congress had, through some previously undiscovered capacity for prescience, divined and approved the subsequent interpretations of the enforcers. Judge Bea quite correctly observed:
It is Congress’s intent we must value and apply, not the intent of the Executive Department, the Department of Justice, or the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Moreover, it is the enforcement of immigration laws that this case is about, not whether a state can decree who can come into the country, what an alien may do while here, or how long an alien can stay in this country. (emphasis in original)
Judge Bea provides a thoughtful analysis of congressional intent, as revealed by the actual wording of the federal immigration laws; the majority opinion does not. As to the allegedly tremendous burden the Arizona statutes would place upon federal immigration authorities, Judge Bea observed:
The majority also finds that state officers reporting illegal aliens to federal officers, Arizona would interfere with ICE’s [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] “priorities and strategies.” Maj. Op. at 4824. It is only by speaking in such important-sounding abstractions — “priorities and strategies” — that such an argument can be made palatable to the unquestioning. How can simply informing federal authorities of the presence of an illegal alien, which represents the full extent of Section 2(B)’s limited scope of state-federal interaction, possibly interfere with federal priorities and strategies — unless such priorities and strategies are to avoid learning of the presence of illegal aliens? What would we say to a fire station which told its community not to report fires because such information would interfere with the fire station’s “priorities and strategies” for detecting and extinguishing fires?
…
The majority’s arguments regarding how any of the state officers’ actions spelled out in Section 2(B) could interfere with federal immigration enforcement is consistent with only one premise: the complaining federal authorities do not want to enforce the immigration laws regarding the presence of illegal aliens, and do not want any help from the state of Arizona that would pressure federal officers to have to enforce those immigration laws. With respect, regardless what may be the intent of the Executive, I cannot accept this premise as accurately expressing the intent of Congress. (emphasis in original)
All of this is interesting and useful. However, the perhaps most important jewel in his opinion resonates with substantial force in this globalist world where all nations (perhaps all but the United States) must have a say in the domestic activities of all others. As Judge Bea noted at some length, the majority relied heavily on foreign unhappiness with the Arizona laws. It is hardly surprising that there has been foreign unhappiness, much of it stimulated by the early statements of President Obama and his attorney general — even before General Holder had read the statute. President Obama commented in late April of last year:
You can try to make it really tough on people who look like they, quote, unquote look like illegal immigrants. One of the things that the law says is that local officials are allow[ed] to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers, but you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.
These comments were, of course, “poorly conceived,” as a reading of the statutes as amended on April 30, 2010, should reveal. The April 30 changes were intended to and should have diminished President Obama’s stated concerns; of course they did not:
For any lawful contact stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released. The person’s immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.
Decade after inexorable decade, we the people just roll over and accept the verdict of Humpty Dumpty, because after all he’s wearing a black robe and there’s nothing we can do about it. Or instead we could think about it this way:
The Founders did not foresee our government being progressively hijacked by a vicious political minority that would redefine contempt for the law as a “living Constitution”. It is very late in the day to try to save our Republic. At its core, the left consists of lawlessness and immorality. There is no way to reason with their pursuit of raw power, and any attempt to compromise simply means that the rest of us lose again, only at a slower pace. We have very few options open. Therefore, I propose the following constructive (albeit generic) plan of action:
1) Organized civil disobedience, e.g., at a community local level, withhold payment into an escrow account of taxes going to schools, but ensure that you have conservative legal counsel in place (preferably pro bono) before you start.
2) Nullification at any and all governmental levels up to and including the state; e.g., ignore any court order from any judge who interprets a “living Constitution”. Note that progressives have already successfully done this, e.g., open immigration or sanctuary cities.
3) Secession, perhaps at the county level, but especially at the state level. The end result?.. consider proposals already being made at such blogs as View from the Right: An expanded proposal to divide America into two countries.
These three actions are inherently tied together; they support each other such that where one leaves off another begins. These are also the kind of things that could be discussed at a convention called to draft a new Declaration of Independence. The time has come for the Tea Party to draft that declaration, and then draft some type of supporting federalist papers, after which they must put together a new Constitutional convention.
No more playing defense. We need a vast organized right-wing conspiracy, a strategy and tactics of offense and a new beginning, and we need it now.
My heart goes out to all those who feel as if they are spectators in an Alice In Wonderland novel, gazing at their lives through a looking glass.
Welcome to my world, as the justices in Israel’s social engineering fiefdom re-engineer society to fit their leftwing paradigms.
If you believe I am exaggerating, think again.Israel’s previous Supreme Court head, Aaron Barak, crowed about using the courts to ‘social engineer’ policy.Yes, he said that, yet few batted an eye.Fewer give a damn that Israel’s justices choose ! among themselves who will serve on the bench.Imagine that.
Israel’s courts rarely adjudicate and almost always upend the legislative process.There is NO separation of powers in Israel-none. Whereas the US is built upon said separation, at this point in time it is no longer the case.
So, if US patriots do not want to mirror the injustices heaped upon Israeli patriots due to leftwing machinations, I advise the people not to take this issue lying down.For if they do, the rights of the majority will be trampled upon to execute the ‘rights’ of others-the minority via international edicts.A slipperly slope indeed.
SCOTUS will go 5-4. Mostly depends on how Kennedy feels that morning since he’s all about going to the EU and basking in the praise of him being in favor of foreign (meaning EU) law.
So, we let ourselves be led to self-destruction by “well-meaning” and elitist judges. Regardless of the fact that the hispanic police officers are generally the ones who know who is and is not a legal citizen, generally on first contact and that it is they who generally make the most arrests based on illegal entry into the nation. At the risk of sounding politically incorrect, I have worked with many hispanics in the military and otherwise and they seem, as a group, to be very protective of their families and the nation. Patriotic isn’t the word as they are often very far above simply being “patriotic”. Devout, perhaps? And they were all conservative.
The social-engineers in this nation have but one purpose, to preside over a nation in failure and to suck every last dime out of it they can. They care not about whether their plans actually work or not, so long as the money flows. Wonder why they got so upset over Wisconsin? It’s simple, the cash cow was being threatened, the way they saw it. Those mandatory union dues, which provide, among other things, huge top-of-the-pile, king-of-the-playground salaries to union officials as well as the millions that go to promote socialists in our government, all under the guise of “worker’s rights”.
This isn’t 1920. And the people who work in the public sector are not entitled to their jobs, let alone the luxury of being provided for indefinitely.
But as regards the illegal immigrant situation, we are losing that battle. The socialists for years have used political correctness to defy good sense, as is always the case. The people entrusted with the responsibility of keeping our borders safe and secure are now being bought by the socialists, or are just plain socialists themselves who like to translate our laws into something the way an adult would explain to a child in order to make them sound right.
In other words, they are very sophisticated BS artists. It may be too late. Unfortunately, judges have made sure they are insulated against any harm by virtue of their own (justified) paranoia. They need to be eliminated politically.
there can be only one conclusion. liberals/democrats/progressives are afflicted with a mental impairment.
that adults (supposedly educated adults) would use arguments not fitting a grade school age child is beyond a mistaken wording, these people are mentally deficient.
The long term goal of the progressives have been to break down the social and capitalistic fabric in this country. With their goal in sight convoluted court decisions like this will be more common than before. Each of these judges on the 9th circuit are bucking for a promotion – using catch-all phrases such as “priorities and strategies” are resume builders for progressive judges. These cockroaches have infected our court system to the point where they have nearly tipped the balance in their favor permanently. All that needs to happen is for one of the 4 1/2 (Yeah Kennedy is a half-assed conservative depending on which side of the bed he got up from) justices on the Supreme Court to drop out – giving the progressives the final tipping point. Once that is achieved there is little we will be able to do for many years. I pray nightly for the safety of the conservative side of the Court – not so much for the commies.
Mr. Miller:
“It is possible that decisions of the 9th Circuit are the most frequently overturned by the Supreme Court simply because the 9th Circuit is the biggest in the country.”
So it would appear, and this makes no sense at all. Here’s the map of the 11 Federal Circuits:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Court_of_Appeals_and_District_Court_map.svg
I think it is high time for another Judiciary Act to reorganize these…why in the world does New England and New York rate two Circuits, and Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware and New Jersey rate another, while the ENTIRE West is in thrall to the Froot Loops in Planet San Francisco?
As you point out, this puts the West at the mercy of:
“the 9th Circuit chooses to sacrifice judicial integrity on the altar of political correctness and global multiculturalism transcending the basic notions on which the nation was based and which continue to have substantial importance to most.
People can’t live with the laws decided by a court more concerned with the latest fad than in the fundamentals.
Liberate the rest of the West from the Moonbats who adjudicate over the 9th, thereby limiting the damage they do.
There have been moves to break up the 9th Circuit but thus far they have been unsuccessful. It’s a good idea.
Awright, so state/local cops busting people for bank robbery, kidnapping and drug trafficking is unconstutional too?
Rare in America,a judge stands up to the genocidal racism that is running unchecked through increasingly impoverished Whites. The corporate power structure has created a distraction of “Evil Hispanics” to take the attention of the people off their greed. If Hispanics are no longer thrown into death camps, but are instead allowed to live and breathe, ordinary Whites might get to know them and would no longer blame them for their impoverishment, but will go after the corporate kingpins in their limos and Armani suits.
Other countries more compassionate than the United States have every right to criticize her. Indeed, they live under the iron heel of American corporate and military imperialism, but still manage to provide a caring, compassionate social system sorely lacking in the United States.
SERENITY NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
Is the above poster. A.so drunk on the local university koolaid it can no longer relate to reality, B. making a funny, or C. dangerously inane/insane or lastly just a site pest who slipped in while the screen door was ajar
I think that he or she may be a 9th Circuit District Court Federal judge.
I mean…if the Appellate Circuit judges are as kooky as they are, can you imagine what some of the District judges in that Circuit must be like?
time to start organizing a grass roots security detail for the originalist supreme court justices in case obama wins in 2012
I think obama is smug because he has already won the election.
many would call it election fraud.
like harry reid…did you see him sweat? no because he knew he would win because he had more votes then voters …looking at the stories in weazel zippers it is very scary how he has groups forming around the country.
Tales of 3 Judges: Prosser, Walker, Bolton
. . . In a nation governed not by the people or their elected representatives but more and more by an overbearing,tyrannical federal judiciary, it is likely Judge Bolton’s decision to gut Arizona’s SB 1070 and the 9th Circuit’s affirmation and that Judge Walker’s transparent bias against California’s Proposition 8 will be overlooked and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. As for Wisconsin’s Justice Prosser, SCOTUS is liable to find he stole the election.
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4160)
The 9th has it’s collective head so far up a certain body cavity that they haven’t seen daylight for years! They wouldn’t know the Constitution if it was in front of ‘em & couldn’t make a right decision if their lives depended on it. They are a total judicial joke and a horrible joke on the nation.
The 9th Circus is overturned 90% of the time.
This should have immediately gone to the Supreme Court
The Ninth Circuit could have asked the Supreme Court to take the case without its prior appellate review. Fat chance that the Supreme Court would have agreed. The parties could also have asked the Supreme Court to take the case immediately. Chances that such a request would have been granted? Mighty slim at best.
I understand that at its meeting on Friday, April 15th, the Supreme Court considered Virginia’s request that the ObamaCare decision of Judge Vinson (Federal District Court) be considered without prior review by the Court of Appeals. Seems unlikely, but not impossible. The constitutionality of ObamaCare is probably of greater practical importance to lots more people than is the constitutionality of the Arizona immigration statutes and awaiting a final decision could be more economically destabilizing for the entire country. If the Court grants the request we should know very soon.
The most overturned Circuit Court in the country.