Supporters Of Lawlessness Push Legal Challenges And A Ballot Initiative
You knew they were coming, and here we go!
A referendum drive and a lawsuit have emerged as potential road blocks to Arizona’s tough new law on illegal immigration that has thrust the state into the national spotlight.
The legal action set to be filed Thursday in federal court is aimed a preventing enforcement of the controversial measure, while the ballot question could put it on hold until 2012.
I have news for the supporters of illegal aliens: 67% of Arizonans favor the law, and, no, illegals and other non-US citizens do not get a vote. Though I am sure they’ll try if they get their referendum on the ballot. It should be interesting to see the list and match it up to actual citizens, something I would bet money on that Arizona does.
A draft of the proposed lawsuit obtained by The Associated Press shows the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders will seek an injunction preventing authorities from enforcing the law. The group argues federal law pre-empts state regulation of national borders, and that Arizona’s law violates due-process rights by allowing suspected illegal immigrants to be detained before they’re convicted.
Other Hispanic and civil rights groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, are also planning lawsuits. And U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has said the federal government may challenge the law.
Actually, this is great, as these suits will expose the leftist groups, including the way the DOJ under Obama, as vast left wing supporters of law breakers. Try explaining the position that you support certain people who break the law to middle America, Champs!
At least three Arizona cities also are considering lawsuits to block the law. Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon said the measure would be “economically devastating,” and called on the City Council to sue the state to stop it from taking effect.
Oh, hey, Phil, perhaps those jobs could go to Americans, what say, especially considering the unemployment rate is 9% as of March 2010.
Meanwhile, the loonies are going to stage a protest at the Cubs-Diamondbacks game Thursday. In Chicago. Perhaps Chicago should concern itself with the violence that has many considering calling out the National Guard. A tiny group of moonbats protested the Rockies-Diamondbacks game Wednesday. And there were more calls to boycott the D-Backs.
Also, in Chicago, 20 of about 100 protesters were arrested outside of the Broadview Detention Facility, where they hold the illegals prior to deportation. Some of the unhinged sat down to block vans leaving with illegals.
Finally, to wrap up the original Washington “we don’t have to actually live with the murders, kidnappings, rapes, thefts, and other lawlessness like Arizonans” Post article
The clergy group’s lawsuit targets a provision allowing police to arrest illegal-immigrant day laborers seeking work on the street or anyone trying to hire them, according to the draft. It says the solicitation of work is protected by the First Amendment.
Really? I’m having a hard time finding that in my copy of the Constitution. It’s not free speech, particularly when the person in question is NOT an American citizen.
The weekend before Novemberâ€™s elections, Frank Rich of the New York Times wrote a curious column titled, â€œThe G.O.P. Stalinists Invade Upstate New York.â€
On the other hand, it was rather refreshing to see a journalist with the New York Times use the word pejoratively. Needless to say, that hasnâ€™t always been the case, as weâ€™ll explore in the latest edition of our Silicon Graffiti videoblog…
Huffington Post contributor Sharmine Narwani took the occasion of the murder of our ambassador to Libya to launch into an