As the saying goes, \u201cDon\u2019t count your chickens before they hatch.\u201d It also ain\u2019t over until the ladies and gentlemen who wear the black robes render their decision (expected in June). But from the tenor of the oral arguments and the questions posed by the eight U.S. Supreme Court justices at today\u2019s hearing (Elena Kagan recused herself due to her previous tenure as Solicitor General), there is reason to be optimistic that the Court will side with Arizona on key provisions of its immigration enforcement law, SB 1070.<\/p>\n
This morning\u2019s oral arguments indicate that the justices were skeptical about the Obama Administration\u2019s arguments for seeking to enjoin key provisions of SB 1070. Even Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was appointed to the high court by President Obama, stated that the Administration\u2019s arguments pertain to status verification checks were \u201cnot selling well.\u201d <\/p>\n
In particular, the Justices expressed skepticism about the Obama Administration\u2019s contention that its enforcement priorities (or lack thereof) preempt SB 1070. Justice Antonin Scalia asked U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, who was arguing the case for the Administration, whether he knew of any cases in which the basis of preemption is the \u201cAttorney General\u2019s enforcement discretion,\u201d calling such \u201can extraordinary basis for saying that the state is preempted.\u201d This is because the standard for preemption has always been based on congressional intent\u2014not the whim of whichever President currently resides in the White House. <\/p>\n
Justice Scalia also dismissed Solicitor General Verrilli\u2019s argument that federal law preempts SB 1070 because it would interfere with the national government\u2019s ability to forge and maintain relationships with other countries. In response to this argument, Justice Scalia incredulously asked him, \u201cSo we have to enforce our laws in a manner that will please Mexico?\u201d<\/p>\n
Finally, the Justices questioned the Administration\u2019s desire to enforce U.S. immigration law. Mid-hearing, Chief Justice John Roberts hit the nail on the head when he made the following comment to Solicitor General Verrilli, \u201cIt seems to me that the federal government just doesn\u2019t want to know who is here illegally or not.\u201d <\/p>\n
Based on what we saw and read about today\u2019s Supreme Court hearing, we have strong reason to be optimistic about the forthcoming ruling\u2026but, of course, it ain\u2019t over until the eight men and women in black robes begin writing. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
As the saying goes, \u201cDon\u2019t count your chickens before they hatch.\u201d It also ain\u2019t over until the ladies and gentlemen who wear the black robes render their decision (expected in June). But from the tenor of the oral arguments and the questions posed by the eight U.S. Supreme Court justices at today\u2019s hearing (Elena Kagan<\/p>\n