Supremes Told Arizona Law Repels 'Invasion'

A brief filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court argues that Arizona’s contested state law allowing law-enforcement officers to ask about the legal status of people they encounter is justified because of the virtual “invasion” of the state by outsiders.

“As provided in the Constitution, the power to repel against invasions was … granted to both the federal and the state governments,” stated the brief filed by Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch.

“This action is consistent with the notion that the federal and state governments are both sovereign bodies within the United States,” the brief explained. “Furthermore, the state of Arizona, with its general police power, a power the Founding Fathers intentionally did not give to the federal government, surely has the power to protect the health, safety and welfare of those residing within its borders.”

At issue before the high court is HB 1070. It was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer in April 2010, only to have the Obama administration sue three months later to block it from taking effect. Oral arguments are pending before the court.

According to documents in the case, the cost of illegal immigration into the United States is estimated at some $100 billion, and state and local governments bear about $80 billion of the load.

The Obama administration, which contends regulating immigration is the job of the federal government not the states, also filed lawsuits against similar laws in Alabama, South Carolina and Utah.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco earlier said a judge was right to halt enforcement of the Arizona law. Among the blocked provisions are a requirement that all immigrants carry immigration registration papers, one making it a criminal offense for an illegal immigrant to work in the state and another allowing police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants without warrants.

More here