Obama Will Challenge Arizona Immigration Law

[babylonsister]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/06/17/obama_will_challenge_arizona_immigration_law.html

June 17, 2010

Obama Will Challenge Arizona Immigration Law


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told an interviewer in Ecuador that the Obama administration would challenge the Arizona immigration law in court, according to the Right Scoop.

Said Clinton: "President Obama has spoken out against the law because he thinks that the federal government should be determining immigration policy. And the Justice Department, under his direction, will be bringing a lawsuit against the act."

Ben Smith: "Clinton seems to get ahead of the Justice Department a bit."

[Captain Hilts]

1. Very good. nt

[azmouse]

2. I hope so.

We need the help here to fight the RW idiots.

[nichomachus]

3. Holy crap! What happened?

When Obama defended DOMA and DADT in the most vicious anti-gay rhetoric, the Obama cheerleaders were out telling us that he had no choice. He had to defend every law on the books without exception. You don't think they were lying to us, do you?

Bastard!

[grantcart]

4. DOMA and DADT are federal laws that the attorney general is, by law, required to

represent the US as a defendent.

Moreover the handling of individual cases already underway is done by career lawyers and it is against the law for political appointees to interfere.

Changing DOMA and DADT, both passed by the legislature requires legislation to undo them unless you can mount a case against it on constitutional grounds.

The law in Arizona is a state law that the federal government is going to challenge on constitutional grounds.

[nichomachus]

6. Actually, he's not

Administrations have very often refused to defend laws they disagreed with. This is just another Obama lie.

[grantcart]

8. no they can either support the law or challenge its constitutionality

The Attorney General cannot legally pick and choose what laws he will defend.

If you think about you will see how absurd your position is.

[CTLawGuy]

13. example?

nt

[babylonsister]

5. Vicious, anti-gay rhetoric, from Obama? I must have missed that. nt

[nichomachus]

7. Yes, you must have

The DOMA brief he filed compared gay relationships to incest and child molestation.

[babylonsister]

9. ...

http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2009/06/dissenting-justice-on-doma-brief-part.html


the brief never equates same-sex marriage with incest or "child rape" -- neither explicitly or implicitly.


And since this is not the topic of this discussion, that's as far as I'm going. I just dislike seeing the truth mutilated.

[treestar]

10. Good. A clearly unconstitutional law.

[depakid]

11. "...ahead of the Justice Department a bit."

Not difficult to do.

Actually, difficult not to.

[harkadog]

12. When did Clinton take over DOJ?

Just asking..

[Raine1967]

14. Ben Smith from Politico?

I think he has decided to add his own editorial.

No one said that, but it seems as tho he elicited JUST the thought he hoped to get.

No one said that. Ben Smith added his commentary to the story. I'm pretty sure Ms. Clinton would not have said this if it was not going to happen.

[Ter]

15. The downside to this is if it's overturned, there will be anti-fed hysteria

Not good in these times, a state or two might go rogue and break free.

[POAS]

16. The anti-fed hysteria

will continue unabated with or without the overturning of the Arizona law. To choose to let what the Justice Dept. considers an unconstitutional law stand without challenge would be a bigger downside. Coddling the anti-American separatists and racists is not a viable option.