Tuesday, May 10

Federal law trumps state laws...unless you're a Democrat city or state

Remember when Arizona voters passed a law that empowered state law enforcement officers to ask people they apprehended to provide evidence of citizenship? That was precisely enforcing a valid federal law.

Predictably, the Obama administration immediately sued Arizona to block this. The grounds? That federal law trumped state law, so the states couldn't enforce federal law. Or some such.

So...federal law overrides states and localities. At least, sometimes it does--depending on whether it fits the goals of the Obama folks.

Case in point: There's a federal program called the "Secure Communities program," under which local law enforcement are required to turn illegal criminals over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for deportation. But--again predictably--liberal politicians in San Francisco and Illinois have decided they don't want to do this.

So of course Obama's Attorney-General, Eric Holder, jumped right on 'em and filed suit to force them to comply.

What? He didn't?

Well, did Obama threaten to withhold federal funds if San Fran and Illinois refused to obey the provisions of the federal law?

What? He didn't?

But...but...but...isn't one of the key provisions of the Constitution that the laws of the land be enforced *uniformly* for all persons and jurisdictions, instead of insisting that one's political opponents obey the laws while turning a blind eye to violations by your friends?

If we stop enforcing the laws equally on all, wouldn't that make us just another banana republic or communist state?

Or, say, Chicago?


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home