Earlier this week I declared the Supreme Court’s ruling on Arizona Senate Bill 1070 a victory for life, liberty, freedom, and the libertarian way. Maybe not in so many words, but that’s how I felt at the time.
Upon further inspection, I’m beginning to feel it was a loss in all three principles. My initial declaration was based solely on the fact that they upheld the provision in which officers are required to check for legal residency status. In defense of my naïveté, I was led to believe that this was the ONLY provision in the entire bill by — you guessed it — the media. Liberals were so up in arms about the possibility of “racial profiling” that the media never bothered to explain the remainder of the bill, and I never thought to consider any part of the bill that wasn’t controversial (at the time, I was writing for Colorado State’s local newspaper and severely wanted to stick it to the liberals on campus).
The second provision, in which it was declared a crime for an illegal immigrant to work or to seek work in Arizona, was struck down by the Supreme Court. I find this highly disconcerting. Here we have a state absolutely ravaged by the negative effects of illegal immigration, and the Supreme Court affirms that federal law trumps state law. While I agree with the principle, a natural question arises: Is it truly a federal law if the federal government refuses to enforce it?
Just a week ago King Obama declared he would no longer make it a priority to seek the deportation of illegal immigrants meeting certain criteria. Some say he is well within his bounds because as the head of the executive branch he can determine which laws are a priority based on the resources available (I counter with the idea, then, that I should reserve the right to forgo my federal taxes in lieu of buying a new house on the same principle).
What is most disconcerting is that we have a president and a bunch of crooks surrounding him who have clearly sided with criminals who cross the border for freebies (perhaps freedom, too, but mere intent cannot refund the taxpayers’ dollars). And when a state asks for aid, they are subsequently ignored. Further on, when seeking further aid from the Supreme Court, they are once again turned away.
While the Supreme Court’s decision may have been the correct one (the Constitution makes it clear that federal law trumps state law), I can’t help but wonder if we are witnessing the end of the United States. Mitt Romney is now beginning to pander to the Hispanic crowd in the attempt to garner more votes, and I think we’ll continue to see both Democrats and Republicans doing this. It can only mean one thing — full amnesty is inevitable. Surely, in 50 years, when we are overrun by Mexicans and other Hispanics, they will seek the further dismantling of the Constitution and will achieve it by sheer numbers.
I’m bracing for the Supreme Court’s decision on ObamaCare later this week — and I’m no longer certain they will even strike down the individual mandate. For freedom’s sake — for the sake of the United States and all she stands for — I hope they do.