Scalia plays politician; Romney plays possum

In another sign of just how screwy things have gotten, Mitt Romney, the GOP nominee for president, steadfastly refuses to get involved in the political debate about immigration. He refuses to offer his own ideas about a national immigration strategy*, and he won’t voice an opinion on President Obama’s controversial decision not to deport illegal aliens who were brought here as young children.

But worry not: A supposedly nonpolitical Supreme Court justice, Antonin Scalia, is eager to jump into the political fray where Romney is too meek to tread. In his radical dissent to today’s ruling on the Arizona immigration law, Scalia argues that Arizona and the other 49 states have the right to exercise “what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there.”

“Even in its international relations, the federal government must live with the inconvenient fact that it is a Union of independent states, who have their own sover­eign powers,” Scalia writes.

Just as remarkably, Scalia used his dissent to lambaste Obama’s decision regarding children of illegal immigrants, slyly referring to “the Executive’s unwise targeting” of available resources to combat illegal immigration.

“The husbanding of scarce enforcement resources can hardly be the justification for this, since the considerable administrative cost of conduct­ing as many as 1.4 million background checks, and ruling on the biennial requests for dispensation that the non-enforcement program envisions, will necessarily be deducted from immigration enforcement,” Scalia complained.

Scalia plays politician; Romney plays possum.

­

———-

*Note: Here’s the official Romney response to today’s ruling:

“Today’s decision underscores the need for a president who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy. President Obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration. This represents yet another broken promise by this president. I believe that each state has the duty — and the right — to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibilities. As Candidate Obama, he promised to present an immigration plan during his first year in office. But four years later, we are still waiting.”

– Jay Bookman

726 comments Add your comment

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 25th, 2012
2:03 pm

Exactly where did Romney leave his gonards? On a curb someplace in Oshkosh?

Perhaps 5 years of campaigning is getting to Romney?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 25th, 2012
2:04 pm

Well I am certain we will hear the cries of judicial activism from the right.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 25th, 2012
2:05 pm

Republican leadership— flip, flop, cower and be afraid

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 25th, 2012
2:07 pm

Somebody send Cheesy Grits another instruction manual for his Etch-a-Sketch. I believe he misplaced them with his privates.

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 25th, 2012
2:07 pm

Romney is letting Obama do what he does best (recently): fail

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 25th, 2012
2:08 pm

Geez, could Romney be a bigger wimp?

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 25th, 2012
2:08 pm

Good majority decision. I look forward to the hood majority decision on obamacare on Thursday.

They BOTH suck

June 25th, 2012
2:09 pm

Jm

You are going to be solemn man

Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!

June 25th, 2012
2:10 pm

Mitt Romney is truly the “Man Of The People”. He will be anything, say anything, and do anything that he thinks will get your vote. He has changed opinions so many times that it can be truthfully said he has no opinion at all. The man is a moral coward.

the cat

June 25th, 2012
2:10 pm

Can’t wait for the debates. Rommey will not be able to duck and hide and blubber.

Immigration Law for the State of Georgia

June 25th, 2012
2:10 pm

Georgia followed Arizona’s lead and wasted the taxpayers money again. They tried with the Birther situation, Immigration Law and also the Healthcare Law. When will it end Georgia Legislature. Jim Crow days are over!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8IqkRbxcTA

East Lake Ira

June 25th, 2012
2:11 pm

Romney lies with such ease these days, I’m surprised he doesn’t just say what the cretins want to hear and then deny it tomorrow.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 25th, 2012
2:12 pm

Possums everywhere are really insulted by the comparison.

Mr. Snarky

June 25th, 2012
2:13 pm

Here’s hoping Alabama issues its own currency!

Newt Gingrich challenges Mitt Romney on immigration

June 25th, 2012
2:14 pm

Joe Hussein Mama

June 25th, 2012
2:14 pm

M. Romney, via Jay — “I believe that each state has the duty — and the right — to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibilities.”

What a shame that the SCOTUS says you’re wrong, Mr. Romney. Enjoy your real-world rebuke.

Doggone/GA

June 25th, 2012
2:15 pm

“I believe that each state has the duty — and the right — to secure our borders ”

“Our” borders? Shouldn’t that be THEIR borders…or is Romney now advocating that states can enforce the border laws in other states too?

Mark in mid-town

June 25th, 2012
2:15 pm

jay, are you saying that Romney engaged in the equivalent of voting “present”? Why when Romney does it does that all of a sudden bother you?

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:16 pm

is Romney now advocating that states can enforce the border laws in other states too?

dunno–how does that question poll in Ohio?

Verbal Kint

June 25th, 2012
2:16 pm

Romney’s response is Obama is lame. Yep. Pretty much.

LUCIFER

June 25th, 2012
2:17 pm

No, no, Romney has a plan to reduce illegal immigration in our country. Quite naturally, illegal immigrants will suddenly realize the errors of their ways, pack up their kids and move back to where they came from, and then reapply for legal U.S. entry. His plan at self-deportation sounds honest and reasonable right? Hey wait — I can hear the illegal masses now marching back across the border.

Joe Hussein Mama

June 25th, 2012
2:18 pm

Mr. Snarky — “Here’s hoping Alabama issues its own currency!”

10 wood chips = moon pie wrapper

10 moon pie wrappers = co-coler bottle cap

10 co-coler bottle caps = used ticket stub to Bama home game

10 used ticket stubs to Bama home games = 1 Dixieland Doller

:D

Road Scholar

June 25th, 2012
2:18 pm

Mitt:Sen. McConnell is still waiting for you to tell him what to say in regards to immigration. (Crickets chirping) He was sure you had a position. (Crickets chirping)

JamVet

June 25th, 2012
2:18 pm

Willard the Spineless.

If he gets 25% of the Latino vote, I’ll be surprised.

Gawd knows he doesn’t deserve that much…

A new survey found that an overwhelming majority of Latino voters believe the Republican Party is “hostile” toward them and is alienating them.

The impreMedia/Latino Decisions survey also found that not even a potential nomination of Latino Sen. Marco Rubio as vice president could do much to change their sentiments.

Another key finding of the survey is that Latinos are turned off by Republican’s support for tougher immigration enforcement over the creation of a path to citizenship.

“Over the last five years, a lot of Latinos have been upset and moving away from the [Republican] party because of the hard stance on immigration,” said Matt Barreto, Principal Pollster for Latino Decisions. “So the Republican Party has a lot of work to do.”

A total of 500 registered Latino voters were included in the poll. It found that Latinos persistently lean toward President Obama and Democratic candidates, with 46% of them saying that Republicans “don’t care too much” about Latinos. Almost a third, 27%, said Republicans “are being hostile.”

The survey is also the first to examine Sen. Rubio’s favorability with Latino voters from across the nation. If Rubio were to be nominated by Republicans as vice president only 13% of respondents said they would be “much more likely” to vote for the GOP. Almost half of the respondents, 46 %, said it would “have no effect” on their decision.

As a voting bloc, up to 22 million Latinos are expected to be eligible to vote in 2012, Latinos will play no small role in the outcome of next year’s elections. The winner in swing states with large Latino populations like Florida, Nevada, Colorado, and even Virginia could very well be determined by the Latino vote. These are all states won by President Obama in 2008.

http://www.newstaco.com/2011/12/15/poll-shows-the-gop-seen-as-hostile-by-latino-voters/

HDB

June 25th, 2012
2:19 pm

Romney is doing more than playing possom…..he doesn’t want to get challenged so that the nation can REALLY see what he’s about!!

Republicans Spurn NABJ Convention

The Republican National Committee and the putative GOP standard-bearer, Mitt Romney, have ceded the National Association of Black Journalists convention to the Democrats, rejecting invitations to send speakers or panelists that the Democrats eagerly accepted.

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. addressed the convention Wednesday on its opening night, delivering his campaign’s talking points. A Friday afternoon session, “A Working Journalist’s Guide: Obama Administration Insiders You Need to Know,” featured four press contacts in the Obama administration. Additionally, at least three representatives from the Obama reelection campaign were available to discuss the state of the campaign, also on Friday afternoon.

“We reached out consistently and vigorously to the Romney campaign asking that he appear,” Sonya Ross, a Washington editor at the Associated Press who chairs the NABJ’s Political Journalism Task Force, told Journal-isms.

“We also made overtures to the Republican National Committee. We wanted to make sure we reached both political parties to ask them to participate. The DNC,” she said, referring to the Democratic National Committee, “came to us and asked us, ‘Can we be there?’ . . . We got no such overtures from the Republican National Committee.

“If the Republican National Committee wants to come tonight or Saturday or Sunday, we would love to see them.”

http://www.theroot.com/blogs/national-association-black-journalists/republicans-spurn-nabj-convention?wpisrc=root_more_news

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 25th, 2012
2:19 pm

Mark in Midtown

Voting Present? That old canard.

I think it’s safe to say you know absolutely nothing about the senate rules in IL….

Mr. Silly Pants

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:20 pm

Sover­eign states. Did someone just change the clock back to 1835?

East Lake Ira

June 25th, 2012
2:20 pm

TaxPayer

June 25th, 2012
2:20 pm

Scalia is interviewing for Romney’s running mate.

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

June 25th, 2012
2:21 pm

Actually

Romney is doing more of a ……

“OBL determined to attack” “ignore the problem” thing…..

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 25th, 2012
2:21 pm

Romney and the Conservative plan is to make the economy much much worse – so the Hispanics (and most everyone else) will leave to find work elsewhere.

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:24 pm

If you liked bush as President, you will love Romney. Same tent, same people on the cabinet. Same chorus, cifferent verse.

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 25th, 2012
2:24 pm

Tbs 2:09 – not really. I can see it both ways. Whatever they decide is fine by me.

Gordon

June 25th, 2012
2:24 pm

Romney is wrong about states having the right to enforce immigration laws, but his is right about Obama not providing leadership in this area. Obama’s obvious pandering won’t fool very many people who weren’t going to vote for him anyway.

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:24 pm

Scalia is interviewing for Romney’s running mate.

Willard/Vaff@nculo. I like the sound of that.

Curious

June 25th, 2012
2:26 pm

Nobody answered my question.

Is Romney more like the snake oil salesman in “The Outlaw Josy Wales” or Reverend Ike?

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:26 pm

Butch Cassidy

June 25th, 2012
2:26 pm

“I believe that each state has the duty — and the right — to secure our borders and preserve the rule of law, particularly when the federal government has failed to meet its responsibilities.”

So now Romney feels that he is above the SCOTUS? That’s going to be problematic when he accuses Obama of being above the SCOTUS isn’t it?

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:28 pm

Curious

June 25th, 2012
2:26 pm

_

I vote snake oil salesman.

Butch Cassidy

June 25th, 2012
2:29 pm

“Borders are people my friend”

M. Romney

Joe Hussein Mama

June 25th, 2012
2:29 pm

SfD — “Willard/Vaff@nculo. I like the sound of that.”

Hmm. I know that at least one President sat on the SCOTUS after his term in office was over (Taft), but I’m not aware of any Justices who left office and then later served in the Legislative or Executive sides of the house.

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:30 pm

Did someone say playing possum?

hey, any excuse to give that one another look…

http://carlysimonalbumcovers.blogspot.com/2011/05/playing-possum-1975.html

ragnar danneskjold

June 25th, 2012
2:30 pm

Strange essay. Is the Supreme Court “activist” because it overruled a portion of a law duly enacted by a large majority, or is it protecting the individual from the power of government? Arizona foreshadows ObamaCare.

TaxPayer

June 25th, 2012
2:31 pm

Is Romney more like the snake oil salesman in “The Outlaw Josy Wales” or Reverend Ike?

Perhaps more like the bible salesman played by John Goodman in O Brother, Where Art Thou.

Dekalb comments

June 25th, 2012
2:32 pm

Scalia must be impeached and removed!!!

Justice Scalia should NEVER comment or include in an official opinion of the Court, any matter that was not brought before it by the plaintiffs or argued by the defendants. His political view on a recent decision by the President, absent having that matter be presented before the Court as a case under review is not consistent with Court history or protocol.

Time for the grease monkey to slink off to some retirement community. What a waste of a seat on the Court.

Doggone/GA

June 25th, 2012
2:32 pm

“Scalia is interviewing for Romney’s running mate”

I wish that was true…then he’d have to resign from the court

Doggone/GA

June 25th, 2012
2:33 pm

“but his is right about Obama not providing leadership in this area”

and nevermind that deportations are way UP under this admin. Doesn’t mean a thing.

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:34 pm

Time for the grease monkey to slink off to some retirement community.

um…

that’s not helpful.

Curious

June 25th, 2012
2:34 pm

Romney is not as physically violent as John Goodman was in that movie, otherwise the same MO.

Bruno

June 25th, 2012
2:34 pm

Don’t know about y’all, but there’s only one SCOTUS decision that I’m concerned with right now: The (un)Constitutionality of using the Interstate Commerce Clause to force citizens to purchase a for-profit product. Unless this obvious misuse of the Commerce Clause is struck down, it will be “Anything Goes” moving forward. Based upon the Kelo vs. New London case, it’s obvious to me how the Lib justices feel about the matter.

Tundra Dude

June 25th, 2012
2:35 pm

The Cayman Islands rep wrote:

“Today’s decision underscores the need for a president who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy.

Pray tell, sir, do you have anyone in mind….??

Joe Hussein Mama

June 25th, 2012
2:36 pm

D. Comments — “Justice Scalia should NEVER comment or include in an official opinion of the Court, any matter that was not brought before it by the plaintiffs or argued by the defendants. His political view on a recent decision by the President, absent having that matter be presented before the Court as a case under review is not consistent with Court history or protocol.”

I give Scalia points for recusing himself in the Newdow case, but IMO he should have recused himself from Cheney v. DC (regarding the secret energy panels).

How will Georgia pay for Immigration Law?

June 25th, 2012
2:36 pm

ATLANTA —

Opponents of the immigration law, known as House Bill 87, say it will cost too much for cities and counties to carry out. In particular, they say communities could be stuck with low-level illegal alien defendants who are not a priority for federal immigration officials.A federal program might not cover the full costs of Georgia’s new immigration law. When Gov. Nathan Deal signed the bill into law this month, he said a U.S. Department of Homeland Security program called 287 g could help pick up the tab.

Responding to a question from a reporter at the bill-signing ceremony, Deal said, “One of the areas that this bill addresses is something we have encouraged for some time and that is for local communities to be a part of the federal 287(g) program.”

He continued, “There are some financial incentives for that and I would encourage the Department of Homeland Security to approve those applications for some of our counties who want to participate in that program but have not received approval at this point.”

The program is a partnership between the federal government and local police departments. Homeland Security trains officers to enforce immigration laws.

A handful of communities in Georgia already participate in the program.

Brittany Nystrom is an immigration lawyer. She’s studied the 287(g) program and she says local communities will foot most of the cost of enforcing the law.

http://www.gpb.org/news/2011/05/26/who-will-pay-for-new-immigration-law#

Peadawg

June 25th, 2012
2:37 pm

“Romney plays possum.”

I can’t think of another ‘p’ word that isn’t appropriate for this blog.

East Lake Ira

June 25th, 2012
2:37 pm

Bruno,

Based on you affinity for Kelo, is it correct to assume you don’t believe in the taking of personal property for businesses use and that you therefore are against Keystone?

I hope so…

Peadawg

June 25th, 2012
2:37 pm

**can think**

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 25th, 2012
2:38 pm

Will jay criticize the dissenters in obamacare as “politicians”

Probably not

Joe Hussein Mama

June 25th, 2012
2:38 pm

Peadawg — “I can’t think of another ‘p’ word that isn’t appropriate for this blog.”

Oh, come now.

8*

Soothsayer

June 25th, 2012
2:39 pm

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:39 pm

ragnar danneskjold

June 25th, 2012
2:30 pm
_____

Since the 1960’s at least, conservatives have defined activist courts as those overturning laws passed by congress, and urged judicial restraint, which they define as deferring to the actions of congress in passing laws presumedly favored by a majority of the people.
So by that definition, this court is an activist court which failed to exercise judicial restraint and the legislated from the bench.

GT

June 25th, 2012
2:42 pm

It is all smoke and mirrors with Romney. And who is running anyway? I am getting a lot of Tim Pawlenty everywhere I look but no Romney. Now we are getting Antonin Scalia a Supreme Court judge to do his dirty work. Pawlenty and Scallia taking cheap shots at Obama yet Romney is too busy to deal with communicating a vision of America. Scallia who is in the middle of the historic session of his career and the court’s has all this time but not Romney. No plan, just vague smoke drifting from his mouth. The debates will split this thing wide open, and probably the Republicans put Pawlenty up there too, which I wish they would. Pawlenty has mastered the not take a breath, smirk and lie routine and journalist give way. Only in a debate when they call the pope, Jewish, and John Wayne a Nazi will some one have the courage or the character to shut this down. For now the press and local press are getting rich off the attention, so why put cold water on the obvious. I am just so glad they can’t buy the court, our last hope for pure justice.

D

June 25th, 2012
2:42 pm

shame on Romney for making such statements. where does he get off saying states should “secure our borders and enforce the rule of law”. Crazy talk.

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:42 pm

Bruno: It was already anything goes. Wickard v Filburn. And if we’re reversing that one, we reverse Social Security, Medicare, and damn near every federal government program that went to the Supreme Court in a challenge that Wickard v Filburn was used as precedent for.

Boris Badnoff

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

Spin. Spin. Spin. Who to believe? Bookman or across the pond?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2164449/Blow-Obama-Supreme-Court-upholds-controversial-portion-Arizona-immigration-law.html#ixzz1yotq4CMq

Remember all you brides. Give your wedding presents to Our Beloved Messiah. Reports are the sea levels on the east coast are rising. Only he can bring them down. What do you need a toaster for anyway? Global Warming will burn the bread for you.

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

Today’s decision underscores the need for a president who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy. President Obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration.

Lawl.

The more you guys keep saying Obama has failed on things he obviously hasn’t failed on, the more you make yourselves look bad.

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

Can you say “procrastinator” on this blog? is that allowed?

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

D

June 25th, 2012
2:42 pm

______

That is the kind of talk people use who know nothing about out constitution, our government or out court system Not the kind of man we need in the white house.

yuzeyurbrane

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

If I were Scalia I would not drive through Arizona, Georgia, Alabama, etc. After all, he is kind of swarthy complexioned with one of those funny foreign sounding names which might cause the local sheriff to ask for “papers please”. And he better have his long form birth certificate on his person!

weetamoe

June 25th, 2012
2:44 pm

There is no need for Romney to respond. Republicans are wise to avoid being set up. Obama’s main tactic has been to tell various groups he courts how much republicans dislike them. Jay does not make clear the context of Scalia’s remarks. Did he stand on the steps of the courthouse or phone Limbaugh or is Jay just repeating what Scalia said in his dissent? When Obama’s secret service guards confiscated the forks from 1000 latinos did they put the tableware on ebay to fatten up his campaign war chest? Do Macy’s and Pottery Barn have Obama donations listed on their wedding gift registry sites? Much as I hate to admit, I think the court’s decision on Obamacare will be stet. So let your celebration begin.

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:45 pm

By the way, if you haven’t voted for Obama and never intended to, stop pretending you care about what promises he kept or broke.

Doggone/GA

June 25th, 2012
2:45 pm

“The more you guys keep saying Obama has failed on things he obviously hasn’t failed on, the more you make yourselves look bad.”

Well, you see…here’s the problem: they obviously prefer someone who talks that talk, to someone who walks the walk.

Peadawg

June 25th, 2012
2:45 pm

” As Candidate Obama, he promised to present an immigration plan during his first year in office. But four years later, we are still waiting.”

Didn’t he introduce the DREAM Act?

Paul

June 25th, 2012
2:47 pm

Romney is following what is basically a decent strategy for a general election: keep the focus on your opponent. Attack, attack, attack. Do not get diverted from making it all about the opponent. Do not, do not, do not, get drawn into anything that will divert from the main issue of the economy, for that is greatest area for exploitation and success.

If Romney were to put forth anything on immigration, air time would be devoted to Democratic talking heads attacking Romney and using it to question other decisions he’d make as president. He’d also be open to attacks from farfarRight Republicans, leading to even more air time about “is Romney losing his base?” “and “are Republicans abandoning Romney?”

Pres Obama’s team may not like it, but it’s a sound political strategy. Romney is not so much selling himself as he is selling the idea Pres Obama did not get the results the people expected.

It’s a quick campaign. Minimize defense, keep pushing offense.

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:47 pm

Didn’t he introduce the DREAM Act?

See what I mean? The skeptical among us aren’t buying this kind of bullsh*t.

Thank you for pointing this particularly inconsistency out yet again Peadawg.

Halftrack

June 25th, 2012
2:47 pm

Judge Scalia is correct. Where the Liberals don’t like it, the “rights” that are not granted to the Federal government are retained by the several States; as per the Constitution. Where the Federal government abandons its duty and responsibility the States have the right and obligation to protect its citizens. Also a moral thought: it is not right for aliens to come to your house and take the sustenance of your children. We wouldn’t have to discuss this if our government found a good solution and had been accountable all along but the problem is too much of a political advantage for those in power.

Adam

June 25th, 2012
2:49 pm

Halftrack: So where do you stand on the state’s right to limit campaign contributions in state elections? Because SCOTUS says they have no right to do that.

Paul

June 25th, 2012
2:50 pm

Oh, and on Scalia: law school professors will undoubtedly hate him, as they will have to come up with new lesson plans to fill the hours previously devoted to discussing the question “Do justices decide cases based upon their ideology and then construct a legal justification to support it?”

Bruno

June 25th, 2012
2:50 pm

Based on you affinity for Kelo, is it correct to assume you don’t believe in the taking of personal property for businesses use and that you therefore are against Keystone?

Good question, but I’m not sure if the Keystone case is equivalent to the Kelo case, in which people’s homes were taken and turned over to a local developer. The original intent of eminent domain laws was to make available land for “public use”. This language was rewritten as “public good” by the Lib justices. Very subtle, but highly important distinction.

JPP

June 25th, 2012
2:50 pm

While I don’t agree with anything Romney says, he knows that he has at least 45 – 47% of the vote in the bag no matter what he says. He’s banking on the notion that the electorate will be so fed up with Obama that they just want an alternative. And that strategy might work.

stands for decibels

June 25th, 2012
2:50 pm

So where do you stand on the state’s right to limit campaign contributions in state elections?

…to say nothing of a city’s, or a district’s, right to regulate personal handgun ownership?

A dad

June 25th, 2012
2:51 pm

Dekalb comments: your “grease monkey” re Justice Antonin Scalia is deplorable. I can only imagine the diatribes and vitriol I would endure on this blog if I referred to Obama as a “porch monkey” or some other racially-based derogatory comment. Disagree with Scalia is you must (obviously you, with your readily apparent superior legal education and knowledge, are not a strict constructionalist as is Justice Scalia), but let’s leave the racially-based insults at home shall we?

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:51 pm

Where the Federal government abandons its duty and responsibility the States have the right and obligation to protect its citizens

_________

Where in the constitution or court decision did you find this little jewel of a thought. Dangerous thinking to make stuff up and post it. That’s not law, that’s anarchy.

Oscar

June 25th, 2012
2:53 pm

Do justices decide cases based upon their ideology and then construct a legal justification to support it?”

-___________________

Well, that’s what most judges really do, but no one really talks about it to much. It’s like the elephant in the room.

Erwin's cat

June 25th, 2012
2:53 pm

Obama’s plan is temporary, short sighted and merely vote pandering…and it’ll probably work…

Romeny is right that a comprehensive national immigration strategy is what is needed, but I don’t see that happening either since it requires bipartisan cooperation

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

June 25th, 2012
2:54 pm

Well, I’ve met alot of possums in my time. A few will stand and fight. Most will just roll over and play dead. I think saying Romney plays possum gives a whole bunch of good possums a bad name. Bookman ought to be ashamed of hisself. I say let’s stand up for possums everywhere.

They BOTH suck

June 25th, 2012
2:54 pm

Paul @ 2:47

Great point

A dad

June 25th, 2012
2:54 pm

Paul – actually a lot of law professors do not teach black letter law, but rahter, try to infect and brainwash you with their personal view. Case in point, I had a criminal law prof who, for an 1:15 class, spend about 10-15 minutes discussion the actual holding and applicable law (you know, that silly little thing which an attorney would actually rely upon to represent a client) and the remaingin hour plus telling us why Brennan and Marshall (probably the two most notroiously liberal Justices in the history of the court) were “right”, notwithstanding the fact the decisions were usually 7-2.

Peadawg

June 25th, 2012
2:55 pm

“By the way, if you haven’t voted for Obama and never intended to, stop pretending you care about what promises he kept or broke.”

So only people who have/will vote for Obama can have an opinion and care about what he does?

:roll:

Bro, facepalm?

Bruno

June 25th, 2012
2:56 pm

Bruno: It was already anything goes. Wickard v Filburn.

Not exactly so, Adam. Wicard vs Filburn only established that you can’t set up a private market on your own. The insurance mandate goes far beyond that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

Sean

June 25th, 2012
2:56 pm

I find that it is a little scary that a Supreme Court Judge is acting so publicly like a politician. yes there are going to be cons and libs on the bench, but to his actions almost make it hard to believe he is even remotely interested in hearing the arguments being presented before him.

They BOTH suck

June 25th, 2012
2:57 pm

Peadawg @ 2:55

Agreed

GT

June 25th, 2012
2:57 pm

You are like Cinderella’s step sisters. “You promised to have that floor clean!” the whole time spilling new stuff on it to make it harder for her to clean. The Republicans blocked the passage then make Obama look like the guilty party. Do you think for one moment your actions in that thing yall called a debate did not registered on the immigrate vote in this country? You are like a guy that slaps his wife and then pretends he didn’t do it only to repeat the violence later on.

Soothsayer

June 25th, 2012
2:58 pm

“Just wanted you all here to know that SoothSayer has lately taken to insulting my GF on the blog, using sexual language.”

WTF are you talking about? What have I ever posted that has insulted your GF with sexual language or otherwise?

Ol' Timer

June 25th, 2012
2:58 pm

You guys are misreading Romney when you say he’s spineless. He’ll gladly pander to the right wing by sending our young people into harms way in another unwinnable middle-eastern conflict. Chickenhawks like to show their courage by getting others to die for their country.

Towncrier

June 25th, 2012
2:58 pm

“Scalia plays politician; Romney plays possum.”

And Jay plays propagandist (once again).

At least Scalia does not allude to “Penumbras and emanations” in the Constitution. But I guess Jay prefers that kind of interpretation and judgement.

Jm-pass TSPLOST silly people

June 25th, 2012
2:59 pm

The dream act is not sn immigration plan

Dekalb comments

June 25th, 2012
3:00 pm

@ Halftrack 2:47 p.m.

Please provide the Constitutional basis for your statement that where the federal government abandons its duty, the states can step in. They did not cover that provision in my ConLaw class in law school but I’m sure you are much more informed.

Article I, Section 8 says grants to Congress the power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization’. That power has historically been recognized as including the establishment of policies regarding immigration and naturalization.

The Roberts Court today, a very conservative court, said that the executive branch still has broad discretion in the implementation of such laws because they touch on our humanity.

I also suggest you do some research on the net economic BENEFIT to our nation from our undocumented visitors. Study after study has shown that in the aggregate there is a net economic benefit from their presence.

Personally I see that as a way to deflate wages and benefits for Americans and should not be tolerated but even given the benefits they may or may not exact from public programs, the economy benefits from their presence.

Soothsayer

June 25th, 2012
3:01 pm

Not only that, but I am relatively certain that I have never called you a POS.

Towncrier

June 25th, 2012
3:02 pm

“Well, that’s what most judges really do, but no one really talks about it to much. It’s like the elephant in the room.”

I suspect there is a lot of truth in that, Oscar.

Erwin's cat

June 25th, 2012
3:02 pm

“Didn’t he introduce the DREAM Act?”

No…the Dream Act was introduced in 2001 by Durbin and Hatch…several versions have come and gone since….reintroduce it maybe, but it still falls far short of the original