Mark your calendars, fight fans. The battle many Americans have been waiting for has finally arrived – the immigration Fight of the Century.
In the red corner, weighing in at a dainty 100-something pounds: Jan Brewer, a.k.a. “the Great White Dope.”
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.”
Here’s hoping.
About Hector Luis Alamo, Jr.
baaahahahaha
chocolate jesus babyyyyyy!
lol… great article!
I take offense to the the title, the last thing we as Latinos need to do is refer to people by their skin color, Obama v. Brewer would have been a better title.
@Orlando….stop being so sensitive!
And pay attention to the real issue here…
The DOJ should be going after the sanctuary cities if they are really concerned about enforcing federal law.
Its not about legal immigration. It’s about a certain population wanting amnesty for people that break the laws. I hope the governor wins – she is only trying to protect her state and do what the Federal government should be enforcing anyway.
Obama hasn’t deported enough.
…meanwhile companies enjoy the cheap labor of illegal immigrants…
Rasmussen Reports found back in February of 2011 that 67% of Americans say states should be able to enforce immigration laws if the feds are not. Just 22% disagree (3 to 1 margin).
With a last name “Ramirez”…you wouldnt be enjoying the citizenship and liberty u now have if “certain” people didnt immigrate here so that u could have a better life….funny how people such as you forget those sacrifices made and are quick to judge their own.
My parents came here legally. With a name like Ramirez I would be pissed off as hell if certain people broke the law to get here while others sacrificed and did it by the book.
Plus, those people are not my own. And legal immigration is one thing-a good thing, illegal invasion is another. Don’t change or confuse the language.
Oh really and how exactly did your parents managed to come here legally mario???
No, the immigration fight of the century will be when armed illegals, communists, and drug lords form a group to battle a well armed legal contingent of Americans. Then the real and much needed battle will begin to protect US borders and independence.
We are letting to much immigrants in this country and like if we need more…It time to take America back…we keep letting more come in here and they wont have respect for us..Soon there will be no English and we would have to learn there language…mean while,we go to their there country and we have respect their ways and that sad we let them do what ever they want here…..
Or maybe the real battle will start when the real aliens from mars come to invade our country…. I think that will be of epic proportions! Hahaha!
Chocolate Jesus? I think you have some chocolate on your face from kissing his ass so much. If you’re putting your “homeland” before the country that has given you more opportunity than the country you came from, than maybe you should consider going back. You can be Latino and proud, like I am, but I am first and foremost an American.
You can also be a proud american and a bigot!
How is “Chocolate Jesus” not racist, offensive, and disrespectful? Bigot because I don’t want people breaking the immigrations laws of our country and exploiting our social programs and tax dollars?
Oh wow and how exactly do you that to be true, precised and accurate? Or do you just follow along with the inscendiary rhetoric that the GOP throws out there to scare the population of the brown menace? Come up with real unbias facts and stattistics and then we can have a grown up discussion until then bigot still fits right.
Legal Mario?…so we are to believe that huh?..fact is the majority of immigrants live on less than $1 a day…cost of living is a hell of a lot more…in order for any to come here “legally” as u point out, one must be wealthy…they are the only ones that have the luxury of coming over “legally”…so unless you’ve lived in poverty all your life Mario, you are f’n clueless of the sacrifics those human beings, yes u probably forgot that too, make…and whats that non-sense of taking over….over what??…last time i checked…2 seconds ago.. white anglos were the majority and with the highest income and purchasing power….so dont put out that bigot crap about immigrants taking over….not unless you are a low paying janitor, waiter, landscaper, etc….
Jonathan….all Latinos are Americans…we come from South, Central and North America…
You know what I meant, Juan.
Mario Ramirez says: “No, the immigration fight of the century will be when armed illegals, communists, and drug lords form a group to battle a well armed legal contingent of Americans. Then the real and much needed battle will begin to protect US borders and independence.”
Mario Ramirez, you are paranoid wacko.
Jonathan Torres – Yes, you’re a bigot because your views are based on racist myths about undocumented immigration, and yet you continue spewing anti-immigrant nonsense. Undocumented immigrants may or may not use social programs, but they add to the economy in important ways such as by contributing over $7 billion a year to Social Security – http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/business/05immigration.html?_r=1&ei=5090&en=78c87ac4641dc383&ex=
“Many Americans believe that undocumented immigrants are exploiting the United States economy. The widespread belief is that ‘illegal aliens’ cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy. This belief is demonstrably false. ‘[E]very empirical study of illegals’ economic impact demonstrates the opposite . . . :undocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services.’ Moreover, undocumented immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy by investing and consuming goods and services; filling millions of ‘essential worker’ positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and making unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs. Eighty-five percent of eminent economists surveyed have concluded that undocumented immigrants have had a positive (seventy-four percent) or neutral (eleven percent) impact on the U.S. economy – “The Taxation of Undocumented Immigrants: Separate, Unequal, and Without Representation” by Francine Lipman.