In a new twist in the fight over Arizona’s immigration law, Republican Gov. Jan Brewer on Tuesday asked a federal court to disallow foreign governments from joining the U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit to overturn the law.
The move comes in response to a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling issued Monday, allowing nearly a dozen Latin American countries — Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, Peru and Chile — to submit friend-of-the-court briefs in Justice’s challenge to SB 1070, which Brewer signed into law in April and is considered one of the nation’s toughest immigration-enforcement measures. LINK
It’s simply mind-blowing what is going on in Arizona. The Federal Government is actively fighting against one of our states for enforcing laws the feds refuse to. What’s worse is the 9th Circus Court of Appeals is allowing foreign governments to join the suit AGAINST AMERICAN CITIZENS. They are effectively giving as much weight to their opinions as to those of American citizens. Think you could get the same consideration in say Guatemala?
Arizona’s governor, Jan Brewer was duly elected by the citizens of Arizona and therefore speaks for them and their interests, presumably stopping the un-checked flow of illegal aliens into their state. These illegals consume vital government services, paid for by the tax payers of Arizona at a time when local and state governments are struggling to stay afloat. LINK
In another federal court fiasco, the Obama administrations insipid policy of trying to put illegal enemy combatants on trial in civilian courts was dealt its first major setback (AS WIDELY EXPECTED AND PREDICTED) today when another federal judge barred the government’s star witness from testifying and thereby putting the governments entire case in jeopardy. LINK
Reasonable Americans have long ago rejected this “Law Enforcement” approach to warfare started by the Clinton administration. The battlefield is not conducive to legal actions. These people are not fighting for a government, they are fighting for an ideology. You simply can’t apply American laws of jurisprudence to captured terrorists. The rules don’t make sense or apply.
By these standards we would have to read Bin Laden his rights if captured. Does anyone think Manhattan Federal Court is the correct venue for OBL if he happened to be captured alive? Would it be for Hitler? Of course not. It’s insane. Military tribunals are the correct venue for war crimes and those who commit them.
What’s more is that the Times Square Bomber Faisal Shazad pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in jail today yet that story was buried on CNN’s website way back on the justice page. You would think that story would be front page news given the magnitude of what this terrorist attempted to do. In any event CNN left out (curiously) the most important part of Shazad’s statement at sentencing:
“The defeat of the US is imminent and will happen in the near future,” a defiant Shahzad told the court shortly before his sentence was announced. “Brace yourselves because the war with the Muslims has just begun,” he warned Americans.When Judge Cedarbaum asked him, “Didn’t you swear allegiance to this country?”,Shahzad replied: “I sweared, but I didn’t mean it.”
Shahzad replied: “I sweared, but I didn’t mean it.”
“We don’t expect your freedom… we already have Sharia law and freedom.”“We Muslims don’t abide by human made laws because they are corrupt,” a relaxed Shahzad said and alleged that his family was threatened by FBI when he was being questioned.
“I want to plead guilty, and I’m going to plead guilty 100 times over because until the hour the US pulls its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, and stops the drone strikes in Somalia, Yemen and in Pakistan, and stops the occupation of Muslim lands, and stops killing the Muslims, and stops reporting the Muslims to its government, we will be attacking US and I plead guilty to that,” he had said in a statement in June. LINK
Making a statement in the court, the former budget analyst said: