Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

"Memo from 2002 could complicate challenge of Arizona immigration law"

That’s how the Washington Post frames it, at least:

In the legal battle over Arizona’s new immigration law, an ironic subtext has emerged: whether a Bush-era legal opinion complicates a potential Obama administration lawsuit against Arizona.

The document, written in 2002 by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, concluded that state police officers have “inherent power” to arrest undocumented immigrants for violating federal law. It was issued by Jay S. Bybee, who also helped write controversial memos from the same era that sanctioned harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects.

The author of the Arizona law — which has drawn strong opposition from top Obama administration officials — has cited the authority granted in the 2002 memo as a basis for the legislation. The Obama administration has not withdrawn the memo, and some backers of the Arizona law said Monday that because it remains in place, a Justice Department lawsuit against Arizona would be awkward at best.

“The Justice Department’s official position as of now is that local law enforcement has the inherent authority to enforce federal immigration law,” said Robert Driscoll, a former Justice Department Civil Rights Division official in the George W. Bush administration who represents an Arizona sheriff known for aggressive immigration enforcement. “How can you blame someone for exercising authority that the department says they have?”

You’ll note that when the Post isn’t tripping all over itself trying to excuse the Obama administration (the tension between the adminstration’s stated position and their legal position is “ironic” and a “subtext”; the text of the prevailing policy memo was written by a would-be torture advocate tied to Bush; an Arizona sheriff is known not for his aggressive pursuit of illegal immigrants, but rather for his “aggressive immigration enforcement,” etc.), it eventually gets to the crux of the matter: Obama’s DOJ hasn’t pulled the memo in the 16 months Obama has been in office — suggesting either that the administration is in agreement with the policy position, or else that they read policy papers about as closely as they read their own legislation before rushing it through with no partisan support and then taking ill-advised victory laps.

Writes Ed Morrissey:

Eric Holder has been AG for almost as long, being one of the first Cabinet members confirmed by the Senate after Obama assumed office. During the transition, both men promised to “hit the ground running,” which should have meant a review of policy positions across the board. Immigration reform was a key agenda item for Obama and the Democrats — and yet no one at the DoJ or the White House apparently thought to withdraw this memo. That speaks volumes about competence.

One reason the memo remains in place is because it’s just common sense. The federal government works with state and local authorities to enforce federal law in other areas, especially on drugs, for example. The same applies to immigration violations when police already have detained a person for probable cause on another potential crime, as the law (now) stipulates. Unless we’re prepared to fund a massive federal police agency with officers in every town in America, the federal government needs to have state and local authorities helping to enforce federal laws — even the laws that the Obama administration doesn’t want to enforce. Especially those laws.

Well, that seems to suggest that the federal government under King Obama has an interest in delegating authority.

Which is funny when attributed to an administration that owns car companies and has placed itself in charge of banks and health care providers.

(h/t Joe)

39 Replies to “"Memo from 2002 could complicate challenge of Arizona immigration law"”

  1. cranky-d says:

    By “hit the ground running” they meant “pursue our progressive agenda immediately upon entering office.”

  2. JimK says:

    Jeff, I keep telling ya to pen up the beast, but no you wouldn’t listen:
    http://www.kcci.com/news/23592313/detail.html

  3. Mikey NTH says:

    OT: Jeff – I was over at Ace. The little armored guy wasn’t heading to Iowa by any chance – was he?

  4. LTC John says:

    “Andrews said the animal also could have been captured, brought to Iowa and dumped.”

    Is Jeff’s armadillo settling some old scores?

    The delightful thing about the memo is that if they pull it, it looks extra-super clumsy and I can’t wait to hear the explanation for why so long… “BOOOSH!?” Combine that with the wilful ignorance of the actual AZ law, and refusal to read it and I’m thinking I should go back into practice and take on the DoJ wherever possible. It would be easy meat.

  5. Makewi says:

    The fact that the MSM doesn’t openly mock the Attorney General and Head of DHS for criticizing a law both have admitted to not even reading tells you everything you need to know about the state of our press as well as the executive branch of our Federal government.

  6. Kresh says:

    Oops. Always read the contract before you sign.

    Then again, you should also read the contract after you sign. You know, just in case you might have missed something.

    Then again, operating and making grandiose pronouncements without all the information is a hallmark of the Obama administration, no?

  7. dicentra says:

    They missed the memo because the WH are too busy harassing Glenn Beck’s sponsors.

    A representative of [Goldline] circulated an email this afternoon:

    Tomorrow May 18th Congressman Weiner (NY-D) will be either having a press conference or sending out a press release that will involve Goldline International and Glenn Beck. Congressman Weiner will also be going after other conservative supporters that endorse Goldline International. We are not sure what exactly Weiner will be saying but we do know that it will not be favorable to either Goldline or any of the conservative personalities that support Goldline.

    Quoth Beck:

    everybody wants to call me Joe McCarthy. I’m a private citizen! I do not have the power of the state behind me. … are you really telling me that the, one of the political and spiritual advisors for Barack Obama did not tell Barack Obama that he was leading a campaign against me with Christians? Why?

    For social justice. Why is he doing it for social justice? I’ll tell you. Tonight I’m spending a whole hour on it. Because the White House has now taken their … faith- based initiative that everybody had a problem with under George W. Bush. And he has merged it with the EPA. And if your church gets on board and helps sell cap-and-trade and global warming, it will be easier for your church to get loans. What? What?

    All in the name of social, economic, and environmental justice. That’s why they targeted me and tried to get the Christian community and the faith based community to turn on me, to discredit me. Because I was ahead of the curve and told you, look out; they are coming for your church. They are doing it. We announced it yesterday after the White House announced it.

    Are you telling me that Jim Wallis, there’s no coordination with his campaign against me and the White House? Are you really expecting me to believe that Van Jones’ organizations is completely — there’s nobody in the White House that knows his organization led a boycott against me for seven straight months? Are you telling me that Andy Stern’s SEIU is running a campaign against me but no one at the White House knows that SEIU is doing that? No one. There’s no coordination there? And now we have Weiner coming out for a Weiner assault on my advertisers and me?

  8. JeffS says:

    …I’m thinking I should go back into practice and take on the DoJ wherever possible. It would be easy meat.

    TASTY easy meat, LTC John. Minimal spicing required.

  9. John Bradley says:

    “Weiner assault”… it’s just fun to say.
    And it’d be a fine name for a band.

  10. dicentra says:

    Su-weeeet!

    Gary Pierce, Arizona Corporation Commission, to Antonio Villaraigosa, L.A. mayor:Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

    I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies — a vote you strongly supported — to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).

    You explained your support of the boycott as follows: “While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars — or the withholding of our dollars — to send a message.” (emphasis by GP)

    I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the “resources and ties” we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

    If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.

    People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.

    Sincerely,

    Commissioner Gary Pierce

  11. John Bradley says:

    Kudos, Mr. Pierce – that’s some ball-dippingly-good “back-atcha” right there.
    (Now, where’d I leave that pudding…)

  12. JeffS says:

    BTW…….where’s happyfeet? You’d think he’s be all over Obama for sending the wrong message to a bloc of potential voters.

  13. cranky-d says:

    I said that he was not bringing anything to the conversation and suggested he leave, so he did. I have that kind of power over others.

    FEAR ME!!!!

  14. cranky-d says:

    If you’re not careful, I’ll suggest you leave. Then what will you do?

  15. Slartibartfast says:

    Oh. happyfeets left? When’d that happen?

    I mean: not as if it’s a big surprise or anything. It’s almost as if he wanted to antagonize everyone and then have us thank him for it, or something.

  16. Kresh says:

    I love living in my state. Failstate racists who have a firm sack-hold on the mouthy haters in Los Angeles.

    Wait, does catch-wrestling have a “sack hold?” Maybe Pierce reads this site and learned it… If he didn’t learn it here at PW, well, we’re pretty creative out here in Failstate Arizona. We would have discovered it eventually. After all, we did make the left shit the bed merely by suggesting that the law be enforced, and then deciding to do just that.

    *fistpump*

  17. newrouter says:

    happyfeet was deported with some illegal buds

  18. TomB says:

    Shorter: Gary Pierce, Arizona Corporation Commission, to Antonio Villaraigosa, L.A. mayor:Dear Mayor Villaraigosa,

    EAT ME!

    I’ll be in my bunk.

  19. Mikey NTH says:

    The attack on the author tells me that they have nothing – nothing – to attack the legal analysis in the memo. So like the Obama Administration to open its mouth and then find out (“nevermind”) that they aren’t folowing published precendent.

    Sweet Jesus on a Crutch! Have any of these Ivy League brains done any work on any thing, thought about any thing, since they got accepted to their universities? Have they all just used their sheepskin as a magic carpet to a world of power and postion based on nepotism from school and family?

    And I do know that my questions were rhetorical and the answers were ‘yes’.

    The more I think about it, the more I am starting to agree – Attila had a point, and razing the Ivy League to the ground would be a good start. Searching down its whelps where ever they have dug in and rooting them out would be a good follow up.

  20. Mikey NTH says:

    In Michigan, in the absence of a court decision, an Attorney General opinion on a law receives some deference. I would be surprised if the federal government operates differently.

  21. […] Protein Wisdom: Obama’s DOJ hasn’t pulled the memo in the 16 months Obama has been in office — suggesting either that the administration is in agreement with the policy position, or else that they read policy papers about as closely as they read their own legislation. […]

  22. newrouter says:

    Attila had a point, and razing the Ivy League to the ground would be a good start.

    nah too pol pot, expose the grifter nation that is “ivy” league

  23. ThomasD says:

    The Constitution is clear on this one. Congress may step in at any point and determine what role state law enforcement may play in enforcing immigration law. They have not.

    I’m not giving Obama, Holder, or the DOJ a pass on any of this though. Until Congress does something to make it stick the ball is in their court.

  24. B Moe says:

    For social justice. Why is he doing it for social justice? I’ll tell you. Tonight I’m spending a whole hour on it. Because the White House has now taken their … faith- based initiative that everybody had a problem with under George W. Bush. And he has merged it with the EPA. And if your church gets on board and helps sell cap-and-trade and global warming, it will be easier for your church to get loans.

     Anybody have a link to something on this with details?

  25. newrouter says:

    @24 the international left doesn’t like this:

    Beck vs Social Justice

    socialjustice

    I’m surprised there hasn’t been more attention paid lately to Glenn Beck’s attacks on the idea of social justice:

    “I beg you, look for the words ’social justice’ or ‘economic justice’ on your church web site,” Beck urged his audience. “If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes!”

    If this is meant seriously—and Beck’s sounded the theme in three consecutive shows so I think it is—this seems to me like when McCarthy decided to go after the Army.

    Social Justice is on the website of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops—do Beck’s fans on the mainstream right think all Catholics should leave the Church? Social justice is all over the Vatican’s website.

    link

  26. newrouter says:

    Social Justice is on the website of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops—do Beck’s fans on the mainstream right think all Catholics should leave the Church? Social justice is all over the Vatican’s website.

    no proggs should go to hell where they belong.

  27. newrouter says:

    are the faggots attacking the youth “catholic”? only in progg world.

  28. newrouter says:

    allan proggs be evil losers

  29. Andrew says:

    I’m afraid I lack the vocabulary to express the derision that Obama, et al., merit.

  30. JeffS says:

    If you’re not careful, I’ll suggest you leave. Then what will you do?

    I’ll hire a certain armadillo as a body guard. If I can pry him away from his cheap gin and those transvestite hookers from ‘Frisco.

  31. Kresh says:

    I’ll hire a certain armadillo as a body guard. If I can pry him away from his cheap gin and those transvestite hookers from ‘Frisco.

    You’ll need quite the large crowbar to do that task, my friend. Brobdingnagian is the size I would choose. Then again, I hear SEIU is fairly careless with their thugs, perhaps you could inquire within. I hear their price is cheap, a mere trifle; your soul and honor. Many would consider that a bargain. Not myself, of course, but there are many who do.

  32. dicentra says:

    Beck: And he has merged it with the EPA. And if your church gets on board and helps sell cap-and-trade and global warming, it will be easier for your church to get loans.

    B Moe:
    Anybody have a link to something on this with details?

    Well, you can start with the President’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships A New Era of Partnerships: Report of Recommendations to the President from the whitehouse.gov site (PDF).

    Then go to page 56 and read the recommendations from the Energy Efficiency and Green Jobs section.

    Recommendation 1: Form an Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and assign Faith- and Community-Based Liaisons to EPA regional offices.

    This item is elucidated on the next page thus:

    In order to actualize the potential of faith-based and community groups and their networks across the country toward greening and retrofitting buildings, and other key environmental outcomes, the Council recommends that an Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships be formed at the EPA. We further recommend that the EPA assign or hire Faith- and Community-Based Liaisons at all of their regional offices. (emphasis mine) …

    A coordinated effort staffed through an Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the EPA could help to unleash this potential and activate faith- and community-based networks to promote energy efficiency, environmental responsibility, and green jobs [read: Marxism]. With minimal personnel costs to the Government, massive partnerships could be scaled up through engaging religious and community leaders and organizations.

    [p.58] One of the biggest barriers for faith- and community-based groups in greening buildings is obtaining access to financing. These regional staff liaisons, working in partnership with programs like ENERGY STAR, could assist faith- and community-based groups in either establishing revolving loan programs or working with utility companies to help finance greening building projects. These kinds of financing options, whether through utilities or with local revolving loan programs, need to be fostered at the local and regional levels and would greatly benefit from the ongoing support of regional staff to help facilitate these partnerships.

    That rotten Glenn Beck. Always using the Oministration’s words against it.

    Given that Pelosi has been urging Catholic bishops to flog the Oministration’s agenda from the pulpit, and given that Glenn Beck’s admonition to Christians to challenge the Marxist heresy of “social justice” has earned him the wrath of the Oministration (three WH officials have been trying to lose him his sponsors through boycotts, harassment, and who knows what else), it appears that the Oministration is poised to leverage churches to further his Marxoverde agenda.

    Definitely a good man. Most definitely.

  33. and I can’t wait to hear the explanation for why so long… “BOOOSH!?”

    well, duh. You can’t expect anyone to fix Bush’s messes quickly. see also: Iraq, Afghanistan, the Economy…

  34. J. "Trashman" Peden says:

    Has anyone at all in the Adm. admitted that they’ve read the Az. law? So far I count 0 for 3. By now it has to be a dedicated strategy – devining intent/meaning totally sans the Bill’s words and acting like it is simply not necessary to have read the law in order to face the Press, Public, or Congress. So the subtext would also be that for anyone to read the law or the DOJ memo would make for ~”too much confusing information”?

    These people are very weird.

  35. LTC John says:

    Could we send a pdf of the law and one of the memo to the AG, SEC DHS, et al?

  36. Squid says:

    Nothing’s stopping us, but I’m not sure it would accomplish much. You can lead a horse to water…

  37. JD says:

    So, not only have they not read the AZ law, the Executive Order, and the amendments, but the apparently have not even read the material produced by their own Dept. What in the hell do these people do?

  38. ak4mc says:

    JD, I’d leave it at they have not read.

Comments are closed.