The Immigration Debate: Attorney General Holder Threatens Second Suit Against Arizona

The Immigration Debate: Attorney General Holder Threatens Second Suit Against Arizona

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department hasn’t ruled out filing a second lawsuit challenging Arizona’s immigration law if evidence shows racial profiling at work, Attorney General Eric Holder says.

The Obama administration sued Arizona last week, arguing that the state is impinging on federal responsibilities for dealing with immigration. The state law requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person’s immigration status if there’s reasonable suspicion the person is in the country illegally. It also requires legal immigrants to carry their immigration documents.

The suit didn’t deal with concerns about racial profiling so that it could focus on the most serious problem with the law, Holder said in an interview broadcast Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” In six months or a year, his department might look into the law’s impact on racial profiling, he said. [Previously, that was all AG Holder and President Obama could talk about, “racial discrimination” and “profiling”, while they both played the “race card”, you remember in the weeks before either had even read the Arizona law.]

“If that was the case, we would have the tools and we would bring suit on that basis,” Holder said.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who defends the state immigration law as constitutional, said she believes federal officials would have included racial profiling in the suit if they thought it was an issue.

“Why would they have to hesitate, after all the comments they made, and all the outrage that they made against the bill in regards to racial profiling, that it didn’t show up?” Brewer told The Associated Press during a break in the National Governors Association meeting in Boston.

Brewer said she is confident that the state law can be enforced without racial profiling, which she acknowledged is against state and federal law.

“The bottom line is that people in the Southwest, particularly Arizona, we love our diversity. It’s in our DNA. We are almost, I believe, colorblind,” she said. “It’s just not in us. We’ve grown up, we’ve lived next door, we work together, we eat together. I mean, it’s so different than the issues they always want to relate to the South, you know, in regards to the civil rights issues down there.”

McAuley’s World Comments:

The Immigration Debate: DOJ (Department of Justice) Declares Arizona Immigration Law Legal

Almost 8 years to the day before Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed Arizona’s “Immigration Law” into effect, the United States Department of Justice issued a memo stating that Arizona’s Law is legal.

On April 23, 2002 the DOJ (Department of Justice) considered and rejected the very arguments presented by the Obama Administration through its DOJ by Attorney General Eric Holder in its lawsuit against the State of Arizona.

The “findings” of the DOJ are “memorialized” in the following memo:

The DOJ lawsuit filed in June 2010:

The Arizona Law:

For a full discussion of Arizona’s Immigration Law see:

Following the attacks on the World Trade Towers on 9-11-2001, the United States Congress fundamentally altered the manner in which the United States enforces its Immigration Laws.

Congress enacted many laws after 9-11, laws intended to bring the full force of the States into the National effort to secure our borders and enforce our immigration laws.

By doing this Congress added the nearly 800,000 State and Local Law Enforcement Officers to the less than 20,000 Border Patrol Agents and Immigration and Customers Enforcement Agents employed by the Federal Government …. increasing the total number of law enforcement officers “on the job” by 4000%.

The lawsuit filed by the Obama Administration and Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice has nothing to do with “racial profiling” or “preemption” ….

The lawsuit is nothing more than the political tool being used by the Obama Administration to reverse the security protocols enacted by Congress after 9-11, after the publication of the 9-11 Commission Report.

This lawsuit is nothing more than an ideological extension of the Obama Administration’s policies that call for the closing of Gitmo, the removal of enemy combatants from Military Tribunals to Civilian Courts, the refusal to acknowledge a “war on terror” or “radical jihadists” and the replacement of the term “terrorist attack” with “man made events”.

The Department of Justice’s ideology which was manifested in the decision to “dismiss the charges” against a radical New Black Panther who was guilty of “voter intimidation”, to dismiss the charges after a “default judgment” had been obtained from the Court.

An Administration that refuses to “respect” and “honor” the decisions of our Federal Courts and Constitutional processes, an Administration that has taken the issue of “drilling moratoriums” to the Federal Courts twice and lost on both occasions and rather than follow our Constitutionally prescribed method of filing an “appeal”, the Obama Administration threatens additional “moratoriums” or “Executive Orders” to block drilling and ruin the economy of the Gulf …..

See Holder’s Latest Here: Holder Raises Question On Sept. 11 Death Penalty –

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: