Mark your calendars, fight fans. The battle many Americans have been waiting for has finally arrived – the immigration Fight of the Century.
And in the blue corner, from parts unknown: Barack Obama, a.k.a. “Chocolate Jesus.”
Today, April 25, the United States Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments over Arizona’s controversial immigration law, SB 1070.
The Obama administration brought the case against the state of Arizona for what the administration sees as a violation of federal jurisdiction. The state of Arizona and five other states – Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Indiana and Utah – contend that states have a right to assist the federal government in controlling immigration because the Obama administration has not done enough to stem the flow of illegal immigration into the country.
“This administration has abandoned wholesale immigration law enforcement,” said Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a D.C.-based group that thinks undocumented immigrants are the worst thing since polio. “People come across our border illegally demanding education, jobs and we have an administration that says ‘Fine.’”
Behold the bubble.
The states’ argument would be compelling if it were true. I mean, come on. Do I really have to lay out how President Obama has been tough on immigration enforcement? If a recording-breaking 400,000 deportations every year and tens of thousands of torn immigrant families doesn’t do it for you, maybe a new study released by the Pew Hispanic Center will. The study shows that net migration flow from Mexico into the United States has completely froze – and maybe even reversed.
The politicians supporting the Obama team include a list of the usual characters.
Representative Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) issued a statement toward the end of March stressing the gravity of the case. In bringing the case in front of the Supreme Court, Gutiérrez argued, the administration is “showing that when injustice is condoned by individual states in express violation of the Constitution, the federal government can and will take action to protect the rights of its people.”
“Solutions must come at the federal level,” Gutiérrez wrote, underscoring the argument for federal jurisdiction in the case. “The Constitution makes that clear.”
The congressman is right. Arizona and the other states are in the wrong. Maybe if there were extenuating circumstances that forced their hand in the matter, like if the president actually was doing a lazy job at enforcing immigration law and the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States kept soaring higher and higher. But that’s not what’s happening. More so, the exact opposite is occurring.
But the conservative bubble is completely immune to facts, evidence and statistics.
“It’s Arizona’s right to protect its citizens,” whined Russell Pearce, former Arizona State Senate president and author of the draconian law. (You might remember him from such things as being kicked out of office by Arizona voters in a 2011 recall election.) Pearce warned his fellow conservatives on the bench that if the court were to side with the Obama administration, “34 states in the process of passing laws like Arizona’s will retreat from doing it.”