Patterico's Pontifications

6/22/2010

Report: DOJ Suit Against Arizona will be Filed Next Week

Filed under: Immigration,Law — DRJ @ 7:35 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Jake Tapper reports the Obama Administration’s one-week countdown declaring legal war against Arizona has started.

Mexico will undoubtedly seek leave to file an amicus brief supporting the Obama Administration. The law firm of “Dewey & LeBoeuf is representing the Government of Mexico on a pro bono basis.”

— DRJ

36 Responses to “Report: DOJ Suit Against Arizona will be Filed Next Week”

  1. they sure seem to want to maximalize the press coverage, no?

    wonder why that would be

    happyfeet (19c1da)

  2. Racists.

    JD (d55760)

  3. “…the Arizona law will be enforced in a way that could cause discrimination based on race and nationality.”

    What kind of standing do potential victims have?

    Kevin Murphyr (5ae73e)

  4. They’re at war with AZ, with the people of their own country!

    What next?

    Patricia (160852)

  5. OTOH, someone needs to ask the Republicans what they intend to do with the illegals should they get back in charge. It is getting to the point where the options become two: mass amnesty or mass deportation. In that scenario, the AZ law is actually pretty mild.

    Kevin Murphyr (5ae73e)

  6. Isn’t it the job of the US government to defend Arizona against the attack of a foreign power?

    Insufficiently Sensitive (8906ed)

  7. IS, then the feds would have to sue themselves…

    Gazzer (d79016)

  8. Filing the lawsuit just in time to take media interest off the Kagan hearings.

    mishka (6941c8)

  9. Dewey & LeBoeuf? Not Dewey, Cheatem, and Howe?

    beer 'n pretzels (3d1d61)

  10. Ou est LeBoeuf?

    Gazzer (d79016)

  11. Serious question: When was the last time the DOJ filed a lawsuit against one of the 50 states, and what was the case about?

    Icy Texan (31a5d5)

  12. In answering my own question, I came upon this item ON the DOJ website:

    Thursday, January 7, 2010 Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging New Jersey’s Written Civil Service Examination for Promotion to Police Sergeant Discriminates Against African-Americans and Hispanics

    — And sure enough, the ONLY reason given for the suit is that on a percentage basis blacks and hispanics score lower, and are therefore passed over for promotion at a higher rate than whites.

    IOW, hey New Jersey, Eric Holder is suing you because you don’t employ affirmative action in the promotion of police officers! Great.

    Icy Texan (31a5d5)

  13. The listed points make no sense at all. Should a judge not just laugh this out of court with a rebuke for wasting the court’s time?

    The law as written doesn’t set federal immigration policy at all. It uses federal immigration law as its basis.

    The contention that it “… will be enforced in a way that could cause discrimination based on race and nationality…” is purely hypothetical and, given the law’s specific admonitions against such use, seems entirely speculative as well.

    Correct me if my analogy is incorrect, but isn’t this similar to a case of opposing a neighbor’s building permit to construct a deck conforming to zoning laws on the basis that it might in fact not pass inspection?

    Adjoran (b94778)

  14. This is a complete farce, but the good people of AZ will have to pay the cost of defending themselves against their own national government, as well as against an invasion of illegal immigrants. Every law is potentially discriminatory. So is the enforcement of the law. Prosecutors routinely make decisions about which cases they will take to court. Why not sue them as well? Last but not least, I thought “discrimination based on nationality” was entirely the point of the law. If you aren’t a US citizen, or if you don’t have legal permission to be in the U.S., then you need to go home. What’s wrong with that? Isn’t that the law of the United States? It certainly is the law of Mexico!

    Old Bull (8b0130)

  15. Arizona should enter the text of the Mexican law(s) on immigration, immigrant rights within Mexico and the record of abuses of the Federales and the local Policia when it comes to corruption, robbery, extortion, drug dealing and kidnapping. (I left out a lot of other criminal activity but you get the idea.)

    Si, se puede.

    jakee308 (ace517)

  16. The important question is: Will the DOJ atty filing the papers be accompanied by black panther escorts with weapons?

    Duke DeLand (588caf)

  17. The law firm of “Dewey & LeBoeuf is representing the Government of Mexico on a pro bono basis.”

    Wow, you mean that even the entire nation of Mexico is too poor to afford an attorney? Ordinarily, it would be wrong to fault a law firm for representing an unpopular client. But surely in this case these people should suffer some social kickback. It’s not like they’re just helping a destitute, ignorant, accused terrorist to get a fair trial. These people are gratuitously helping a foreign government to attack one of the 50 states in a court of law.

    It should be made known that these attorneys have chosen another country over their own.

    Gesundheit (cfa313)

  18. Alright, let’s see. First, Mexico has no standing in US law so Mexico should be kicked off the lawsuit. Second, Dewey should not be able to “pro bono” or favoritism slash-rate a sovereign nation in federal court. Third, like Old Bull said, the “based on nationality” part is part of the point. The illegal immigrant is a person of a nationality other than US citizen who is in the US illegally.

    John Hitchcock (9e8ad9)

  19. Is it theoretically possible to slap Holder with a Contempt of Court charge?

    Comment by jakee308 at #15 sounds like a good PR ad:

    “Hispanics United for Hispanics” want to bring equal justice to all lands where Spanish is frequesntly spoken. We want US immigration law to be like Mexican immigration law because everyone knows how evil the United States is. If we change US immigration policy to mirror Mexico then we will have:


    I’m not sure how one would characterize the thinking behind Clinton’s comments in Ecuador about the Arizona law, ridiculous? tone-deaf? absurd?

    Because the #1 reason why people from Ecuador will not get into the United States is Mexico.

    MD in Philly (5a98ff)

  20. Holder is expected to also claim in his suit that the Arizona law will be enforced in a way that could cause discrimination based on race and nationality.

    Dear God, isn’t that sort of the whole point? People of a certain nationality are not supposed to be resident in the US, but they are resident, and in great numbers. Immigration law is supposed to discriminate on the basis of nationality.

    Holder might as well file suit against laws against kidnapping on the grounds that they cause discrimination against kidnappers.

    Americans voted for these radical America-hating leftists, so there can’t be too many objections as the country is destroyed.

    Subotai (f9a946)

  21. DOJ? Isn’t that the same bunch of douchebags who couldn’t be bothered to continue the legal process against the New Black Panthers? In a case they’d already WON?

    greginsocal (9d3587)

  22. Dewey? Of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe?

    Frank Drebbin (8096f2)

  23. number nine funny
    recall larry moe curly
    woo woo woo spread out

    ColonelHaiku (c2b11b)

  24. many Americans
    already hold eric holder
    in plenty contempt

    ColonelHaiku (c2b11b)

  25. Is Holder waiting until gay pride week is over?

    kansas (a59e5f)

  26. not like olden days
    desperate times measures but
    only one stooge now

    ColonelHaiku (c2b11b)

  27. “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a South American television interviewer that the president had told the Justice Department to file the suit on the basis that it’s the constitutional responsibility of the federal government — not states — to set immigration policy.”

    Spare me. The state of Arizona isn’t trying to set “policy”, they’re trying to get existing federal immigration laws enforced.

    Of course, the last thing the liberals want is an Arizona statute that requires Arizona officials to cooperate with the feds in enforcing immigration laws, because the liberals don’t want the law enforced (what they want is a blanket amnesty making poverty stricken Mexicans into American citizens, so that the Democrats can swap free handouts for votes).

    What the liberals want is “sanctuary cities” that REFUSE to cooperate with federal authorities, not states that make it a requirement to determine who is here illegaly and hand them over to the feds.

    That’s why they’re planning on suing Arizona and they sure aren’t planning on suing these so-called sanctuary cities.

    Here’s the heart of the San Francisco ordinance…

    “SEC. 12H.2. USE OF CITY FUNDS PROHIBITED.”

    “No department, agency, commission, officer or employee of the City and County of San Francisco shall use any City funds or resources to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law or to gather or disseminate information regarding the immigration status of individuals in the City and County of San Francisco unless such assistance is required by federal or state statute, regulation or court decision.”

    “The prohibition set forth in this Chapter shall include, but shall not be limited to:”

    “(a) Assisting or cooperating, in one’s official capacity, with any Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) investigation, detention, or arrest procedures, public or clandestine, relating to alleged violations of the civil provisions of the federal immigration law…”

    http://www.bayswan.org/sftraffick/SFcityrefuge.html

    That’s what the liberals want. Laws that PROHIBIT state and local officials from cooperating with federal authorities to enforce immigration laws.

    Dave Surls (9821fb)

  28. Dewey & LeBoeuf

    If DoJ prevails against AZ, would the above named “legal beagals” be allowed to collect costs from AZ.

    AD - RtR/OS! (6f143b)

  29. Honestly, does Eric Holder even have a law degree? Since the law hasn’t even gone into effect, how can he say that it might be used in some discriminatory fashion in the future. Isn’t that pure speculation–any first year law student knows that you can sue based on something no one knows will happen or not. And if he’s going for an injunction, what’s the irreparable harm that the feds will sustain? Enforement of their own law?

    rochf (ae9c58)

  30. Sorry–should read you can’t sue for something that no one knows will happen. This just makes me so mad I can’t see straight.

    rochf (ae9c58)

  31. Racist. That is all.

    JD (23a165)

  32. Mexico filing an amicus brief should be good for another 8-10 point kick in national support for the Arizona law. Talk about a brain dead move!

    daleyrocks (1d0d98)

  33. “It is getting to the point where the options become two: mass amnesty or mass deportation.”

    Nonsense. Deny them financial profit and other benefits, and they will deport themselves. All we must do is enforce the law, and they will do the rest.

    Federal Dog (8dc08a)

  34. I say they ought to deport the illegals to California. Give it back to Mexico. Place nukes underground on the fault lines and send the whole friggin state out to sea. Then Arizona will have some nice new beachfornt property. 😉

    peedoffamerican (e72f77)

  35. I found your blog on google and read a few of your other posts. I just added you to my Google News Reader. Keep up the great work Look forward to reading more from you in the future. I think it will be also nice if you add “send to email” tool so people can forward the articles to their friends easily.

    O(∩_∩)O~

    cheap jerseys (667efb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3134 secs.