Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

Supreme Court To Address Arizona Immigration Law

December 12, 2011 by  

Supreme Court To Address Arizona Immigration Law

On Monday, the Supreme Court announced that it will hear a challenge to Arizona’s controversial immigration law (SB 1070), adding to a list of high-profile cases for the court’s coming term.

Arizona asked the court to allow the State to enforce legislation that was blocked after being challenged by the Administration of Barack Obama, including provisions that would enable police officers to question immigration status if they suspect a person is in the country illegally.

“I would like to commend the U.S. Supreme Court for its decision to review and hear arguments pertaining to the federal court injunction,” said Arizona Governor Jan Brewer in a statement. “I am confident the High Court will uphold Arizona’s constitutional authority and obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens.”

The Justice Department contends that the State is encroaching upon its authority because Arizona’s immigration laws are “expressly designed to rival or supplant that of the Federal government,” according to The Hill.

Justice Elena Kagan, former solicitor in the Obama Administration, recused herself from the case.

According to The Associated Press, the court will hear oral arguments in late April.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Supreme Court To Address Arizona Immigration Law”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • s c

    Once again, the heart of this issue deals with what Uncle Scam is NOT doing. It is NOT a matter of what Uncle Scam IS doing. Uncle Scam is so openly and criminally corrupt that he thinks he can enforce America’s illegal immigrant laws any way he chooses.
    That is, as long as he can get away with it, he will use ‘this’ law, but he will ignore ‘that’ law. That is NOT a matter of protecting the Constitution or the American people. Plain and simple, it is an attempt at BUYING the VOTES of illegal immigrants while Washington’s criminals pretend that they give damn about the Constitution and the laws those miserable *_#^* SWORE to defend and uphold.
    Selective enforcement of the statutes is the polite term for this outrageous infamy. Obummer and his criminals think they are wise enough or have enough constitutional power to interpret the laws of the land any way they choose – when they feel like it.
    Kagan gets no gold star for recusing herself. She knows she can interpret and try to gut the Constitution by not recusing herself when Obummer’s
    Frankenstein healthcare monstrosity comes before the Supreme Court.

  • http://deleted Claire

    Nothing has been done about the situation for decades. All administrations screwed up on this issue. All elected politicians sidetracked this issue, hoping it would “go away.” Now it is time to pay the piper. Something must be done, but which party will accomplish anything? Neither one.

  • APN

    This constitutional issue is about as simple as it gets. Given that, how does our constitution address the issue of illegal immigration?

    Article 4 Section 4

    [...] and [The United States] shall protect each of them [the States] against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence. ”

    I see no mention of “armed” or “passive” invasion. The constitution clearly and SIMPLY states INVASION. Our founders were intelligent people who CLEARLY understood the TROJAN HORSE factor. i.e.; Mexico

    Since this is such a SIMPLE and CLEARLY stated article, then it would appear to me that the President and CONGRESS are in contempt of their sworn duty to UPHOLD the constitution, therefore, all who took that sworn duty that continue to ignore this article should be IMPEACHED.

    I am not a Ron Paul supporter, however, I admire his loyalty to holding true to OUR constitution. Notice I did not say the UN’s constitution or Mexico’s constitution. Given that, just how does Ron Paul interpret this VERY SIMPLE article and I would like to see this article as a centerpiece of the next GOP debate.

    Given the total failure of our Federal government to uphold this article, then those of us with an ounce of common sense can understand why the STATES are taking on this issue at the state level.

    • Joe H

      Ron Paul has already said MANY times he would seal the border. Had they done this, say four or five administrations ago, we wouldn’t have half the problem we have NOW!! The problem keeps getting worse and worse with each passing year!! Awhile back, it was 2 to 3 hundred thousand a year coming across. Now it is % or 7 million a year!!! given enough time it will become the United States of Mexico!!! The Border MUST be sealed!!

      • APN

        How would he do it without the consent of Congress? Would he declare this as what it is, an INVASION and then put our military on the border with orders to shoot to kill?

        • APN

          Now before you answer, be careful, you do understand that Ron Paul CLEARLY stated that the constitution DOES NOT give the President the POWER to take the aforesaid action without the consent of congress.

          • Joe H.

            We already have a majority in congress and if we push a little harder, we can get a clear conservative majority in BOTh houses and the border will be sealed!! Remember, if it’s worth saving, it’s worth working for!!! I, personally think it’s worth SAVING!!!

          • Joe H.

            Besides, Congress already PASSED it in the fact that they ok’d building the fence AND allocated the money to do it!!! Oh, BTW, if you mean the posse cometis law, it doesn’t apply here. The border and it’s defense IS allowed to be done by the constitution!!!

          • APN

            Then this is an ACT of WAR by Mexico, correct?

          • Joe H.

            Although there are probably some here that feel that way, i don’t think the supremes would consider it that. I’m just saying That it is constitutionally the duty of the federal government to patrol and protect the borders of our nation against illegal entry and agression!!

  • alexa

    I don’t think the president needs an act of congress to perform the administration’s constitutional duties. The president is in charge of the cia, fbi, dea and wtf already.

  • Doc Sarvis

    Seems the easiest and BEST way to stop most of the illegal immigration is for U.S. employers to STOP HIRING these people! We are enticing them to come over the border then spending a lot of money finding them and taking them back south.

    • APN

      I’ve heard your argument on this issue many times. Makes no sense to me whatsoever. It would be like accepting a child’s response of “THE DEVIL made me do it!”

      The constitution, specifically A4 S4, does not say…..”This article should only be enforced IF we do not have any dishonest employers hiring ILLEGAL immigrants. Both actions are unlawful and need to be dealt with accordingly by those we have placed in the CONGRESS.

      Your analogy would equate to someone breaking into my home and then another person walking in and stealing whatever they choose. Both are criminals!

      • Joe H.

        Is it or is it NOT illegal for a US employer to hire undocumented, illegal employees? YES! This is why I am for fining them, deporting the ones you catch, ending welfare for all that can’t pass a social security ID check, and no free education for their kids. Also do away with automatic citizenship for kids that are born to non-citizens!! The problem would soon self deport!!


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.