Tuesday, July 6, 2010

A Dishonest Filing

With the text of the lawsuit out, the lawless Obama Regime is now officially claiming that arresting illegal aliens is not the policy of the government.


If allowed to go into effect,S.B. 1070’s mandatory enforcement scheme will conflict with and undermine the federal government’s careful balance
of immigration enforcement priorities
and objectives.

There is no careful balance of immigration enforcement priorities; only a policy of not enforcing immigration laws.

Furthermore it claims that arresting illeg aliens will harm ties with Mexico:



And it will interfere with vital foreign policy and national security interests
by disrupting the United States’ relationship with Mexico and other countries.

Interestingly enough the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) arrests millions of Mexicans every year. Does that interfere with our relations with Mexico? How will a few thousand arrests by Arizona law enforcement harm relations with Mexico while millions of arrests of Mexicans by the USBP apparently have no impact?

Of course, that is not enough, as the filing with the U.S. District Court openly lies about how the law will be enforced:




It will cause the detention and harassment of authorized visitors, immigrants,
and citizens who do not have or carry identification documents specified by the
statute, or who otherwise will be swept into the ambit of S.B. 1070’s “attrition
through enforcement” approach. ...It will altogether ignore humanitarian concerns, such as the protections available under federal law for an alien who has a well-founded fear of persecution or who has been the victim of a natural disaster.

The lie here implies that Arizona will be removing the aliens after their arrest. No, the aliens are turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or the USBP. The aliens are then processed according to policy and practice, where any claim to political asylum or parole will be made. If the aliens are here legally, then will ICE and USBP deport them? No. Legal aliens are required to carry proof of their status, either their green card or passport with Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record. In any event, Arizona police are first required to check with ICE the status of any alien they detain. So there will be no harrassment or detention of legal aliens, if those aliens are following the law, and only a brief detention if they are not carrying their documents, but otherwise legally present.

But worse is the claim that a local police officer arresting an illegal alien will conflict with federal law in the area of registration, smuggling and employment of aliens.



It will conflict with longstanding federal law governing the registration,
smuggling, and employment of aliens.

How this conflicts with federal law is not described. Federal law provides that illegal aliens be arrested and deported. Federal law prohibits the employment of illegal aliens. Federal law prohibits smuggling aliens. The Arizona statute only assists the Federal government in arresting illegal aliens, stopping smuggling and ending employment of illegal aliens. What really interfers with the enforcement of federal immigration law is a sanctuary policy like that in San Francisco, where police officers have to secretly contact ICE to report an illegal alien in violation of the San Francisco sanctuary law and the policy of the San Francisco Sheriff's Office and Sheriff Mike Hennessey to not report illegal aliens arrested for midemeanors.

What the Obama Regime really means is that the policy of not enforcing federal law will be interferred with.

But the biggest lie in the Obama Regime filing with the court is the claim that Congress has given the executive authority to ignore federal law:



In crafting federal immigration law and policy, Congress has necessarily taken
into account multiple and often competing national interests. Assuring
effective enforcement of the provisions against illegal migration and unlawful
presence is a highly important interest, but it is not the singular goal of the
federal immigration laws. The laws also take into account other uniquely
national interests, including facilitating trade and commerce; welcoming those
foreign nationals who visit or immigrate lawfully and ensuring their fair and
equitable treatment wherever they may reside;

The claim is a blatant lie and filled with misdirection. Yes, the laws of the United States provide for commerce with foreign countries, but there is nothing in federal law that says illegal aliens are free to enter and remain in the U.S. Commerce with Mexico has nothing to do with a State arresting an illegal alien in the U.S. How is that interfering with commerce with a foreign nation? Yes, federal law provides for legal entry of aliens, but what does that have to do with arresting illegal aliens? Nothing. It is misdirection, aquainting the legal with the illegal. It is like saying States may not enforce laws against bank robbery because some people may legally withdraw money from a bank.

Even worse is the claim by the Regime that Congress has authorized the President to ignore the laws against illegal immigration:


Decisions to forego removal or criminal penalties result not only from resource
constraints, but also from affirmative policy considerations – including
humanitarian and foreign policy interests – established by Congress and balanced
by the executive branch.

Well, to give an alien a benefit, the Executive must take particular action: parole or adjustment of status. But that is a legal process where the alien must apply for a benefit. Not fulfilling one's sworn duty is not an option. But what the Obama Regime is claiming is that its policy of not enforcing the law is a deliberate act based on relations with Mexico and other countries, as well as what they are calling humanitarian interests, which are allowing illegal immigrants to remain, but remain without a legal status. Humanitarian parole is an option, but that, again, is a legal status that the alien must apply for. Here there is no application, but a policy of not enforcing the law, in violation of the law itself.

What the Obama Regime is claiming in that paragraph is that they have the right to not enforce the law despite the Oath of Office of the President requiring him to see that the laws are faithfully executed. But, like the New Black Panther Party, illegal aliens get a pass, because under the Obama Regime, not all people are equal before the law. Non-feasance is not a reason to prohibit Arizona from enforcing federal law. It is just an impeachable offense.

No comments: