Federation for American Immigration Reform on Arizona Supreme Court ruling

The talk fibre channel 680 WR -- good morning were brought to you by network capital funding corporation your future. Financed. -- is still about the big Supreme Court ruling yesterday joining us now is Dan Stein -- is the president. Of the Federation for American Immigration Reform you can find them that -- US dot org Dan good morning nice to have you back on RKO. Here so. Bob momentous day yesterday one I think you guys were surprised by because you thought this was a law that had been carefully crafted. To satisfy the need to be in alignment with the federal lot of new. They were -- worked very hard. An alliance -- -- outside counsel crystal back to try to make sure that the law conform to what we think. Are the areas where states can act. It's very important because the federal government has been lacks the put it mildly executive branch in carrying out congress' directive. And and this particular law which. We thought very modest that is the approach. Simply sought to enable Arizona to cooperatively work with the executive -- is turn over aliens that appeared to be here illegally. It is is created parallel. Criminal penalties for failure to have the proper billion registration documents. It didn't had a couple novel interesting twists to it one of them was criminalizing these search for employment if you were here illegally and seeking an authorized employment. That was a new novel twist now we've had some success. In you know developing state laws is that. You know require employers to participate in the so we thought this would have a good addition to it. And we've also had some success and state laws that would revoke the business licenses of employers -- pattern in practice violators. Of employer sanctions that we know we thought that this this edition of and you criminal penalties for those who are seeking work illegally was. Unlikely to be used preempted by the 1986 employer sanctions law that congress passed -- this important agreement that. So what what happened I would do you think -- I mean is this a surprise ruling in terms of it. Taking the interpretation. Of the interaction to my understanding of this had been that it's part of the tradition of immigration law. That states are involved and that there's and then there's an expectations. -- dates are going to be implementing this law so what was it that happened yesterday. Well what happened yesterday was that the united -- the court. -- he had justice Robert stranded joint decision with you know that included justice Sotomayor and it was written by Kennedy's you know he's -- -- Consensus builder Robert did not want to lose section two I think it's so he decided he had joint decision because of 44. Eight. Justice Kagan did not participate for four I would have meant that the ninth circuit injunction of the entire law would have been upheld. So what you got was a very politicized decision frankly very shallow decision that suggests. That the executive branch since simply ignore without limits. Any time any congressional. Limits on immigration. -- -- just so. Let me just review that Dan Stein with us from fair. Your saying that Justice Roberts broke the tie. In order to and it because it would have defaulted back to the lower court rejection of the entire law had there not been a decision from the supremes. Right that we wound up with a decision drafted by Kennedy which included you know this incredibly broad spectrum of Robert and Sotomayor. And -- obviously that's what was so well this sadly you have. Wing of the court that agrees with Obama that he added the president can be imperial and just ignored the dictates of congress yeah. And -- required state local communities and taxpayers to deal with this continuing hemorrhage of illegal immigration all without end. And now we have a president -- immediately after the decision turnaround and revoked Arizona's 287 G at the state and local cooperation agreement. At least he's doubling down on the notion of him ignoring the law in order to satisfy his voting base. But what you're saying is that we really didn't get a Supreme Court decision philosophically. Or legally. What we dollars a political decision does designed to salvage. The best case scenario. Well I guess it's hard to imagine any other area of federal law where the Supreme Court with today. You know as a practical matter the you know the in the community administration did -- just ignore the law. Which to view immigration has always been this very weird after child law. Where people in the in the in the in the legal community don't take it seriously as being like legitimate law. And it's I don't want I mean I can get into the hole standing question but the first thing you said at the beginning of the interview was that traditionally. States have been part of the solution and working with the federal government. And that was the status quo prior to the 1970. The Ford Foundation. And other foundations under rode a litigation effort with the Mexican American legal defense fund in the ACLU. -- stop. States from participating in their vacation or status checked in I think it has something to do with voting rights and other document issues they didn't want the established. Because they seem to want you know. Illegal voting curtain you know they'd be seemed to wanna promote. -- standard that the voting Booth where for the moment the motivation. State after state. Agreed through consent decree not due to participate in here buying an alien status. As a result. Even though illegal aliens were entitled to benefit the states were asking an -- that became a big magnet. Then in 1982. The Supreme Court on equal protection grounds decided wrongly in our view is that children here illegally were -- -- entitled to free public education. And that of course set off a huge tidal wave that was huge magnet drawing people here. And now for the first time since 1982 the Supreme Court position another decision and what they did uphold the right of Arizona to pick up -- -- call ice. Immigration customs and state and act out of the year we can give -- a status check. You know again a part time though Barack Obama basically said -- in the birdie there is not gonna enforce. All right what does that leave for a next step for example could Arizona sue the federal -- or maybe authority has. Rob forcing it forcing their hand because -- you know this is their jurisdictions the states need them to do their job in Washington. Well remember well I think the question Arizona would do that naturally that they already tried that mean in fact is -- Arizona and other states have only got into the point out of sheer desperation over what appears to be. A collapse of the federal government the executive branch is the obligation to the American people to secure our border. Mean there's an article the -- and so basically court is that they don't have legal standing they say it's a political questions. They say it's ultimately for congress to figure out basically no matter what we try to do it seems like we get forwarded to. There there is no avenue which we can go down they're all one way is gone in the other direction. So what happens next do you think. Well so clearly they're you know of the area you'll preemption is what they call -- the federal level where they say the Supreme Court says congress. Occupied the deal exclusively. In they have not appear to give any express authority for states to do XY or the so what congress we need to do you know we have a functioning congress. There would be a road map for what we would call real and responsible reform not that amnesty nonsense we keep hearing from the president. People need to understand that the president has precipitated -- constitutional crisis. He's taken oath of office that you know to uphold the constitution and execute the laws of the land. And he's basically saying nobody can make you do it says he has screw you and everyone's gonna have to continue to be you know deal with the cost. Because congress has to step forward once again and very clearly. Direct. The the executive as well it is very clear you know to commissioned this date to enact these complementary reforms. We get the laws enforced because otherwise they're you know we won't have any enforceable limit. And -- affect the policy we have virtually now is anybody here coming illegally unless they commit an independent Syria. Felony not immigration related ballot. They can stay here forever. We're -- -- -- not. Dan is with us from the Federation for American Immigration Reform it's fair US dot org. So were at a stalemate the solution is November. Elections. That's what it comes down to it's a political decision that means we have to rise to the occasion right. It was being like the it's certainly the administration has handed. Mitt Romney in the Republican Party and an incredible issues and opportunities building on the strength of twenty and went all the Republicans were were talking about. The importance of the Arizona bill -- state measures. You know what we're hearing from Mitt Romney's campaign is trying to. In -- you think you know is all nonsense about -- in order to have. Get a shot of the Latino vote the Republicans have to weaken their message you know I I don't think that this Smart way to go of it. If that's their decision at the end moment Romney has to say if I'm elected president I will enforce the law of the United States. Yup that would be a nice approach is taken I think it's one that's with sort of compelling on its face since that is what you squirted do when you. Take the oath of office. Dan any doubt the thought to want to leave us with before you go. Well I think what the president has now done we recognize that we did have a victory in the Supreme Court yesterday on the fundamental issues that the administration opposed. Obama lied repeatedly about the impact protection to claiming. It would cause all these awful things of course it didn't and in fact it is constitutional. And that was a major victory but the president's response. -- not enforcement has precipitated the governor ability crisis. No nation can be successful in delivering effective services. Or equality electorate citizens without effective perimeter controls. You must have control your borders. Or your infrastructure will always be overwhelmed. And that's where we're going there. Dan Stein thank you sir good to talk with -- I'm glad you're so fired up I'm looking forward to the next step. Here Dan Stein fair US dot or if you wanna learn more about what they do they were part of the process of writing in the law. That just face the Supreme Court ruling yesterday let's get your calls on this 6172666868.