Arizona SB 1062 – Religious Freedom
You have to be living under a rock if you haven’t heard of the bill that passed the state legislator in Arizona. SB 1062 would allow businesses to refuse services to gay and lesbian customers based on their religious faith.
I think that Governor Brewer should veto this law because it singles out people who might be homosexual in an unfair manner.
I don’t like strategy of individual states introducing, perhaps passing, legislation codifying a crime to enforce federal laws. The rage right now is, of course, those laws referring to the enforcement of any federal ban or restriction on gun ownership.
The latest version that I’ve seen is in Texas:
AUSTIN, Texas – Under a measure advancing in the Texas Capitol, local police officers could be convicted of a crime for enforcing any new federal gun control laws.
Rep. Steve Toth, a newly elected Republican from the Woodlands, said his proposal would prevent officers from carrying out any future federal orders to confiscate assault rifles and ammunition magazines.
Toth’s proposal would create a Class A misdemeanor for police officers enforcing any new federal gun regulations. It also would establish cause for the state attorney general to sue anyone who seeks to enforce new federal gun regulations. It is one of several states-rights measures being offered by conservative state lawmakers nationwide in response to federal gun control proposals.
I think this is a dangerous path to go down. We can’t have states running around claiming not to enforce federal laws. The confusion it would create is massive. Not to mention the continual lurching back and forth as one party or another assumes the role of majority and passes legislation that would enforce said law.
With that said, I have to admit that I feel a bit of “tribal yelp” as I see the states reacting like this. And I have to work hard to subdue those passions are work to look at the goal objectively.
However, while I don’t think states should willy nilly decide which federal laws they will or will not enforce, it is important to point out that this is in direct response to Obama’s decision to restrict states from enforcing federal laws that HE disagrees with. Namely, states trying to enforce immigration laws already on the books. Let’s not forget the battle in Arizona where the Obama administration sued Arizona.
So, while the logical conclusion of this activity is undesirable, that conclusion was set in motion by Obama.
Update: As regards to 5(C). I disagree with the policy but would have thought that the state could legislate that. Technically speaking, that means I agree with the legality Arizona was getting at and disagree with the Court.
Supreme Court Announces Ruling
This morning the Supreme Court released it’s ruling on the controversial Arizona immigration law passed in 2010. The highly anticipated ruling is one of two high visibility cases heard in this session. The Federal government had sued Arizona as a result of the law. Specifically 4 sections:
- Section 3 – This section made failure to comply with Federal alien-registrations a state misdemeanor.
- Section 6 – Authorizes state and local officers to arrest without a warrant a person “the officer has probable cause to believe . . . has committed any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States”
- 5(C) – This section makes it a misdemeanor for an unauthorized alien to look for or engage in work.
- Section 2(B) – Requires officers conducting a stop, detention, or arrest to make efforts, in some circumstances, to verify the person’s immigration status with the Federal Government
The Supreme Court will have heard two of the most contentious cases that have been heard in the Obama administration by the end of this week. The first, of course, was the case of Obamacare and now the second, the Arizona immigration bill.
I find it fascinating that people are looking at how the court will or should act not based on the legal standing or constitutionality of the laws in question but rather on the policy of the law.
Arizona passed legislation in 2004 that would require individual present photo ID when they want to vote. In fact, Arizona went so far as to require proof of citizenship in order to vote. I’m trying to understand how that whole proof of citizenship thing would work. But clearly I’m in favor of demonstrating you are who you say you are.
At the heart of the case, apparently, is whether or not this requirement presents an undo burden on Latinos. And the court ruled it didn’t:
Arizona is entitled to demand that people present identification before being allowed to cast a ballot, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.
In a split decision, the judges rejected arguments that mandating would-be voters show a driver’s license or other identification unfairly discriminates against Latino voters.
I can’t think of a circumstance where anyone, Latino or not Latino, would find difficulty in obtaining identification that had a picture on it.
I suspect we’ll see more of this in the near future.
I’ve been living in Carolina for awhile now. Today represents the 4,423rd consecutive day that I’ve left my property carrying my ID.
This includes 100% of my trips to the ice cream cone store.
Or, Republicans Can Be Leftists Too!
We all want to what we think is the best for the folks under our care; at least I HOPE that’s what we wanna do. Now, I understand that at the margin, there are politicians that do enter the system and play the game for the sole purpose of enriching themselves, either with power or money–or both.
By and large, however, I think they play the game in an effort to serve well.
And often times serving well means, or can mean, parenting.
There can only be one reason why Obama is suing Arizona: To win votes in upcoming elections.
The law is wildly popular. It mirrors Federal law except when it comes to profiling. Arizona restricts it. The Feds don’t.
But whatever the reason, it’s becoming increasingly clear to Americans that Obama is more concerned with his image than he is with fixing the problems facing the nation.
The absolute absurdity of our President has been reaffirmed today. The man is a walking example of everything that is wrong with our politic today. Uninformed and uncaring about how systems should actually work, Barack just meanders through his version of public opinion and attached unto the vein of the populist.
First we see Holder offer clues that they may change their stance on Miranda and now we see them offering insight into the Arizona immigration law.