SCOTUS Overturns Arizona Immigration Law-- Good!

The ruling is a good thing for those who love the rule of law and the Constitution.

What? Yes, this is a good thing.

It is commendable that the politicians in Arizona wanted to protect the people when the Federal government failed to do so.

But it's not theirs to do, nor more than could Massachusetts decided to levy a tax on imported medical devices to protect its medical manufacturing base. Some things are just exclusively the purview of the States and some things are Federal jurisdiction.

The reinforcement of Federalism goes  towards putting the roles of State and Federal governments back in their respective places, and indicates we should be optimistic about the future of the 10th Amendment balance between Federal and State governments.

What if Aizona had won? The Feds could no longer be held exclusively responsible because they had ceded key parts of their jurisdiction to the States.

We have a Federal government that has badly overstepped its bounds and run roughshod over the states. The remedy for this is not to apply the same malfeasance in the opposite direction, but to robustly define the bright line between Federal and State roles. In short, we need to reinvigorate Federalism.

If the Court had allowed this Arizona law to stand, it would only add to the confusion of fed vs state law and create even more chaos.

While it is desireable that the laws be enforced, the States taking matters into their own hands only increases the lawlessness.

Comments

[J. Hohn]

I wish it was. We have a real problem here, and the root of it is really simple: the Federal Government is abdicating the rule of law-- the same rule of law that is THE core foundational element of Western democracies and distinguished our society more than anything else from tin-pot dictatorships the world over.

The Obama administration is electing NOT to enforce the law. This is a direct violation of the President's oath of office, in which he SWORE that he would "Take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

This puts Arizona in a tight spot that would be obviated if the Federal Government obeyed the law. What relief have they?

The problem is that there is tension between preserving the Federalism that defines the roles of state vs federal governments on the one hand and the state's responsibility to its people.

All of which would be moot if we didn't have a lawless President. Tin pot dictatorship is here in principle, hopefully we can change course before it arrives in reality.

[Erin Leland]

You are of the opinion that the constitution, itself, is not a bright enough line?