POSTED BY: JIM | JUNE 26, 2012, 12:46 AM 12:46 AM

Exactly. Scalia turned his ruling into a partisan rant against a Democratic president and embarrassed the Court.

Did Scalia neglect to mention the majority of the illegal immigrants came into Arizona under Bush and that more illegals are being deported under Obama and more turned back at the border?

“. . . to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforc­ing applications of the Immigration Act that the President declines to enforce boggles the mind.”

“Scalia went on to write:
Arizona bears the brunt of the country’s illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem,and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so. Thousands of Arizona’s estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from en­forcement, and will be able to compete openly with Ari­zona citizens for employment.

“Scalia directly referred to Obama’s immigration enforcement policy as “lax” at one point.

“The federal government “does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States’ borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude,” Scalia alleged.

The civil rights of US citizens or the civil rights of the illegal invaders?

POSTED BY: NOZ | JUNE 25, 2012, 6:05 PM 6:05 PM

Huh?

The civil rights of US citizens or the civil rights of the illegal invaders?

POSTED BY: COMMON _ SENSE | JUNE 25, 2012, 4:05 PM 4:05 PM

Maybe your memory is dangerously short. However, many people remember Florida previously ‘cleaned up’ their voting lists resulting in thousands of voters showing up at the polls to find they’d been wrongly removed from the voting lists and were denied their right to vote. Guess who they were?

POSTED BY: COMMON _ SENSE | JUNE 25, 2012, 4:05 PM 4:05 PM

Yes, and you’re reportedly reporting something that somebody else reportedly reported about something that is reportedly reported to be be reportedly going on. There’s good solid Republican ‘facts’ for you