Does anyone else think it's curious and more than a little coincidental that just when all the protests are going on about the new "strict" Arizona immigration law, the feds (ICE) "arrested 596 illegal immigrants with prior criminal convictions in a three-day sweep across the southeastern United States this week?"
"Most of them will be deported, though 22 may be prosecuted for illegally entering the U.S. after previously having been sent home," (italics mine) "These are not the kind of people that we want walking our streets or living in our communities" Morton told reporters. WELL WE DON'T WANT THEM EITHER. Why doesn't anyone get that?
"All but two dozen of the criminals, some previously convicted of murder, sex crimes, assault and fraud, had been released from jail or prison without being turned over to immigration authorities for removal, as the law provides." That statement is exactly what the Arizona law provides for when criminals are arrested. The ONLY way the Arizona law could be found to be unconstitutional is if the Court decides that a state law cannot mirror a federal law. And if that is the case, then a majority of state laws across the country will be declared unconstitutional.
Wonder how Janet Napolitano sleeps at night. When she was Governor, she refused to sign similar laws because she said it would take resources away from the feds who were busy doing other things. Now, all of a sudden, we are told that in the southeastern part of the United States, criminals should not have been released from incarceration without being turned over to immigration authorities. I didn't know that federal law only applied in certain states or certain parts of the country.
Quotes are from The Arizona Republic, Saturday, May 1, 2010. Reprinted from Tribune Washington Bureau.
Comments welcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment