McCain and Flake support the Gang of Eight Legal immigration while Brewer forgets her placeby Dee Dee Garcia Blase on Jun. 24, 2013, under 2016 Presidential Elections, Legal Immigration Reform
Governor Jan Brewer recently stated she does not endorse the Gang of Eight legal immigration reform bill.
It’s a well known fact that United States Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona support the Gang of eight Legal Immigration reform bill that is being discussed right now. It is also a well known fact that immigration is a policy issue protected under the Supremacy Clause of our United States Constitution. (Which means state governors are not eligible to vote for bills set before Congress.) Thankfully so, because Arizonans remember oh too well the God forsaken SB1070 bill Brewer signed only to be completely gutted out later on by the United States Supreme Court.
Almost a year ago today, we responded to the Supreme Court ruling on SB 1070 and the Governor’s miserable political failure when she tried to over-step her powers with the FEDS. You would think by now that the Gov would know the immigration issue is not an issue for her to solve …. but it is Congress and federal government who needs to solve the broken immigration system.
25 June 2012
National Latino Group Responds to SB 1070 Supreme Court Decision — Not A Good Day for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, Ousted Sen. Russell Pearce, and Kansas Secretary of State, Kris Kobach
Phoenix, AZ — The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution is alive and well today. The US Supreme Court clearly reaffirmed that immigration is within the preview of federal jurisdiction only. Arizona completely lost on the question of 1) undocumented immigrant registration; 2) undocumented immigrant employment; 3) law enforcement officers arresting without a warrant. The 4th provision regarding “papers please” was only narrowly upheld because the Court does not have the necessary facts to determine if the law is valid. The Court stated, “This opinion does not foreclose other preemption and constitutional challenges to the law as interpreted and applied after it goes into effect.” In other words the Court did not have the necessary facts in front of them at this time, but the issue is being left with the door wide open.
Ultimately Arizona et al. vs. the United States reiterated, “…as a general rule it is not a crime for a removable person to remain present in the United States.”
The National Tequila Party Movement (Latina counter movement to the Tea Party movement) is pleased with this ruling. The 4th provision will be challenged as soon as it is implemented. We are confident the Supreme Court will uphold our Civil Rights.