WhatFinger

Americans, take our business and vacations to Arizona and shun places with warped thinking like San Francisco

Boycott Arizona? No! It’s Time For A Massive Show Of Support


By Guest Column Jim Campbell——--May 1, 2010

American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us


Once again, the progressives on the left are shooting off their mouths while failing to read the law.

Arizona's new legislation designed to protect their boarders is Constitutionally affirming Federal Law. The new legislation apparently gets in the way of hysteric race baiters, those that want to file law suits, boycott Arizona and declare the new immigration law signed recently by Governor Brewer Unconstitutional without reading it. It's time that we go on the offense as Americans and take our business and vacations to Arizona and shun places with warped thinking like San Francisco. Arizona has a right to defend its borders and the influx of illegal aliens because the Federal Government will not uphold it's own law. See: Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, "Improper Entry by Alien," any citizen of any country other than the United States It's time for a counter offensive, Google Arizona Illegal Immigration law and target those to boycott. I will not be asking for a table for two anytime soon in the "Windy City" and am booking a long deserved vacation to Tuscon when I complete this post, Random thoughts while observing the passing charade, I'm J.C. Concurrent Enforcement: The principle that protects the Arizona law is the legal principle of concurrent enforcement. This has been recognized by several courts, including the 9th Circuit. It holds that a law is not conflict-preempted if the state law prohibits the same behavior that is already prohibited by federal law. Similarly, if a state officer acts in a way to assist the federal government in that action, he concurrently enforces what is already prohibited under federal law. That principle guides any interpretation of S.B. 1070. The controlling Supreme Court precedent is 1976's De Canas v. Bica. In that case, the Supreme Court recognized states may enact legislation to discourage illegal immigration within their jurisdictions. The mere fact that a state law concerns illegal immigration or affects immigration in some way does not render it pre-empted. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom announced today a moratorium on official city travel to Arizona after the state enacted a controversial new immigration law that directs local police to arrest those suspected of being in the country illegally. The ban on city employee travel to Arizona takes effect immediately, although there are some exceptions, including for law enforcement officials investigating a crime, officials said. It's unclear how many planned trips by city workers will be curtailed. Random thoughts while observing the passing charade, I'm J.C. Jim Campbell runs Charging Elephants. Jim can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com

Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Subscribe

View Comments

Guest Column——

Items of notes and interest from the web.


Sponsored