2010 July 11 Sunday
Eric Holder Threatens Racial Profiling Suit Against AZ

Immigration is the issue where the desires of the elites conflict most severely with the will of the masses. The elites are very keen to defeat the will of the masses. We aren't supposed to notice that illegal immigrants from Mexico are Mexicans.

Washington — Atty. Gen. Eric Holder, the nation's top law enforcement officer, said Sunday he might sue Arizona a second time if he finds its tough-on-illegal-immigrants law leads to racial profiling.

News flash for Eric Holder: The vast majority of illegal aliens from Mexico look like they are from Mexico. If the local police in Arizona start pulling over blue-eyed blondes and ask them questions about where they were born then they might occasionally unearth a woman from Sweden or Norway here on vacation. But it'll be a big waste of time unless the cops want to try to seduce hot tourists.

One core fact has to be kept in mind in the Arizona immigration law enforcement flap: Barack Obama and other top leaders in the Democratic Party do not want immigration law enforced.

When the Obama Administration talks about the Arizona law as interfering with federal immigration law enforcement that's really cheeky. Arizona can't interfere with what the feds aren't doing. Obama is trying to cut spending on immigration law enforcement. The state and local governments are compensating for federal passivity in the face of large scale law violation by illegals.

Here's part of Arizona's response to the federal suit.

iii. SB 1070 does not conflict with federal law

“[C]onflict preemption exists when ‘compliance with both State and federal law is impossible, or when the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.’” Ariz. Contrs. Ass’n v. Napolitano, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96194, at *39 (D. Ariz. Dec. 21, 2007), aff’d sub nom. CPLC, 558 F.3d 856 (quoting Mich. Canners & Freezers Ass'n Inc. v. Agric. Mktg. & Bargaining Bd., 467 U.S. 461, 469 (1984)). Plaintiffs allege that SB 1070 interferes with federal interests and that an actual conflict exists between federal law and SB 1070 with respect to registration, transportation, and harboring, work authorization, and state and local law enforcement officers’ arrest authority. However, an analysis of SB 1070 in connection with plaintiffs’ claims demonstrates that plaintiffs are misconstruing or misapplying the Act.

a. SB 1070 does not interfere with federal interests

Plaintiffs assert that SB 1070 conflicts with “federal government interests.” Compl. 144-46. However, the question in any implied conflict preemption analysis is whether the state law “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment … of the full purposes and objectives of Congress.”29 SB 1070 is not only consistent with federal objectives, but it expressly (and in effect) serves to reinforce existing federal laws. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1304(e), 1306(a), 1324(a)(1)(A), 1324a. In the words of Judge Learned Hand, “it would be unreasonable to suppose that [the federal government’s] purpose was to deny itself any help that the states may allow.” Marsh v. United States, 29 F.2d 172, 174 (2d Cir. 1928). 28 See also 8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) (requiring the federal government to respond to inquiries by state and local police officers seeking to verify the immigration status of any alien); 8 U.S.C. § 1644 (prohibiting restrictions on state and local government entities in “sending to or receiving from the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of an alien in the United States.”).

b. SB 1070 concurrently enforces the documentation
provisions of federal law

Plaintiffs allege that A.R.S. § 13-1509(A) “conflicts with federal law and enforcement priorities.” Compl. 99. This provision, however, precisely conforms to federal law: “In addition to any violation of federal law, a person is guilty of willful failure to complete or carry an alien registration document if the person is in violation of 8 United States Code Section 1304(e) or 1306(a).” A.R.S. § 13-1509(A).30 A.R.S. § 13- 1509(A), (H) further impose the same misdemeanor penalties as federal law imposes for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e) – a maximum fine of $100 and a maximum imprisonment of 30 days. “Where state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement activity is authorized.” Gonzales v. Peoria, 722 F.2d 468, 474 (9th Cir. 1983) (emphasis added), overruled on other grounds by Durgin v. De La Vina, 199 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 1999)). Where “[f]ederal and local enforcement have identical purposes,” preemption does not occur. Id. Because A.R.S. § 13-1509(A) prohibits precisely the same conduct that is prohibited by 8 U.S.C. §§ 1304(e) and 1306(a), Arizona law and federal law are in concurrence.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2010 July 11 06:34 PM  Immigration Elites Versus Masses

Engineer-Poet said at July 11, 2010 9:44 PM:

The least that should happen to any judge who grants an injunction against Arizona in this suit is impeachment.

The least.

no i don't said at July 16, 2010 11:38 AM:

"If the local police in Arizona start pulling over blue-eyed blondes and ask them questions about where they were born then they might occasionally unearth a woman from Sweden or Norway here on vacation."

So it's racial after all, huh? What's with all the hate against Mexicans?

What about pulling over blacks? Would that also be a waste of time? Perhaps you think that there are no black Mexicans... Perhaps you think there are no white illegal Mexicans in the U.S....

Mexico is only a bridge to and from Central and South America also, so there are white, brown, indian, mestizo and black illegals from Tijuana, Mexico to Ushuaía, Argentina.

What about all those illegal Chinese who come by boat or plane? What about all those tourists from all over the world that hold legitimate visas and stay longer to find work?

Illegal aliens are brown, white, black, yellow and red; semitic, mestizo and mulato; catholic, protestant, orthodox, muslim, jewish, budhist and non-religious; Mexican, Chilean, Chinese, Brazilian, Argentine, Peruvian, Guatemalan, Australian, Spaniard, French, Somali, Ethiopian, South African, New Zelander, Russian.

I have nothing against a country guarding its borders from illegal immigration, but the Arizona immigration law is a RACIST ISSUE. It's a law that targets an ethnic group and fosters racism; in time, perhaps much worse. That's why the Federation cannot allow that. Obama is not wrong; the govenor of Arizona is. The Fed is right the State is wrong.
Arizona cannot suddenly play "defender" and "vigilante" while for decades it -and other border states- has been playing hypocritical welcoming host to illegal immigration. The whole issue is just like a whore trying to play virgin after everybody knows her history and background... It's simply ridiculous. That's why California, New Mexico and Texas are not making so much noise, and if they were, it would be just as ridiculous.

For decades the U.S. has welcomed, needed and relied on illegal immigration; it has just been a matter of agricultural season requirements and inlet ammount. It's the game government has played without many people knowing about.

no i don't said at July 16, 2010 12:02 PM:

Arizona Law is double standards, double morals.

What is smooth is not bumpy. What spells "come in" does not spell "get out".

The Federal Government cannot allow the Arizona Law, -at least in practice- simply because it would reveal a case of the U.S. not meaning what it says and not saying what it means. A case of openly aknowledging not doing what it claims to be doing, and simply because it's not feasible. The govenor of Arizona is either being innocent or just oblivious to a reality.

Besides, why Arizona and not California or Texas? I mean, the ammount of illegal influx and stay into AZ can never compare to that of CA and TX.

Can you imagine if the govenor of Arizona was just being populist and not really meaning it in real practice? Ouch!
I think a lot of suckers are in for a big surprise... dissapointment.

Randall Parker said at July 16, 2010 9:11 PM:

no i don't,

It is statistical. Mexicans and Central Americans make up the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens. If some small handful of black illegal alien Mexicans get missed by a focus on people who look like Amerinds so what? The goal is to deport as many illegals as cheaply as possible. That means play the odds and ask the most likely illegal aliens. Accents are a great starting point.

The hate against Mexicans? I'll like them just fine if they stay in Mexico. What is wrong with Mexico that they have to leave? Aren't Mexicans great people, really smart, capable of building a great country? Why can't they turn Mexico into a great country?

mike said at July 17, 2010 11:00 PM:

"But it'll be a big waste of time unless the cops want to try to seduce hot tourists."

Have you seen the documentary "Supertroopers"?

mike said at July 17, 2010 11:07 PM:

"Besides, why Arizona and not California or Texas? I mean, the ammount of illegal influx and stay into AZ can never compare to that of CA and TX."

Yeah what's up with these racist Arizona legislators passing a law in Arizona instead of California or Texas? Don't they know that those other states have bigger immigration problems? Why aren't the Arizona police tackling the immigration problem in California?

no i don't, your arguments are unbelievably dumb. "That's why the Federation cannot allow that"... the Federation? You think this is fucking Star Trek or something? Are you another one of those feckless KGB operatives?

no i don't said at July 20, 2010 7:25 PM:

Oh Mike, Mikee... -Yet another middle schooler wasting time on a computer-

So, for Mike the only thing that comes to mind before the word "Federation" is "Star Trek"... Mike probably has never been told that the U.S. is a Federal Republic, that the U.S. is a Union of States -united in a Federation-. (Maybe Mike was asleep during that U.S. History class) I wonder what are Mike's mental associations every time he hears the phrase Federal Government... "Deep Space 9" perhaps.

Hey Mike! guess what, Russia is also a Federation, and there are many others in the world. -I can almost hear him idiotically laugh and make fun of this previous statement- Surprise, surprise, Mike!

What the hell does Star Trek have to do here, just because you grew up on it?

And what's with the KGB? Turn off the tv Mike, and once in a while turn on a book; or is it that you had too much mcdonald's and soda in your diet since you were a toddler? Too much water lead and fluoridation in your area? Perhaps your mental damage comes all the way from birth...? 'Cause I simply refuse to believe that the U.S. Educational System be that faulty; I just won't accept it.

Don't call us Mike, we'll call you when you finish your junior high.

Somebody please explain the meaning of the word Federation to Mike. Pretty please.

norris hall said at August 9, 2010 5:19 PM:

We've had 46 presidents of the United States.
None of them were asked to prove they are US citizens. None of them were required to show papers. All of them were white.
Along comes the first dark skinned president and what do they do?
They pull him over and demand that he show documentation that he was born in the US.
So he shows his birth records, newspaper clippings of his birth, even has the Republican governor of Hawaii attests to his citizenship
Do the profilers believe him. No. They are not satisfied. They want more proof. They will not rest
How much worse is it going to be for Hispanic looking Americans who don't have governors to vouch for them?
In the US, only white people get a pass.
Everyone else is a suspected illegal

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright ©