Over the past months, the country has seen the DREAM Act and immigration in general being used by both Republicans and Democrats to savage each other politically. With the Arizona ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia demonstrates the Supreme Court gradually becoming an extension of the political branches to join the melee that has polarized and politicized the DREAM Act.
Sounding as partisan as Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, Scalia's dissent in Arizona v. U.S. criticized the president's new Department of Homeland Security directive to stop the deportation of undocumented youth, saying:
"the president said that the new program is 'the right thing to do' in light of Congress's failure to pass the administration's proposed revision of the [DREAM] Act. Perhaps it is, though Arizona may not think so. But to say, as the Court does, that Arizona contradicts federal law by enforcing applications of the Immigration Act that the president declines to enforce boggles the mind."At first blush, the attack appeared to come from the Republican National Committee or immigration hawk Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX). Yet with his dissent's condemnation, Scalia, unbecoming of a federal judge, went beyond analyzing the constitutionality of the Arizona law, delving straight into the heated politics of immigration.
Scalia argued that all of SB1070 should have been upheld because the state is "entitled" to craft its own immigration policy. The majority of the justices held Arizona's law unconstitutional, except the "papers please" provision -- which allows police officers to ask about a person's immigration status if they are pulled over during a lawful stop.
Across the Latino community, both citizen's and non-citizen's alike have felt the sting of anti-immigrant rhetoric, exclusively coming from the Republican party with few exceptions. This has ranged from the policies and rhetoric of Joe Arpaio that Latinos have felt are dehumanizing and unnecessarily harsh, to state policies, like SB 1070, being touted as a "model for the nation" by Mitt Romney. The rhetoric on immigration this election cycle has been extreme, demonstrating a willingness to sacrifice common sense for fanatical politics. This has all contributed to Mitt Romney's unpopularity with Latinos despite his own family's immigration history. Even worse, the rhetoric has made immigration legislatively untouchable. Republican Justice Scalia exacerbated the politics.
"As long as this issue of immigration is a political ping pong that each side uses to win elections and influence votes, I'm telling you, it won't get solved," Sen. Rubio (R-FL) accurately told the audience at National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed conference. We can count on a third side, the Supreme Court, to add to the political calculation as the American public will now have to count partisan votes to determine which side a ruling will fall on.
Much of this rhetoric has come from the fact that this was a hard-fought primary, where Mitt Romney went to the right on immigration to balance out some of his more moderate stances while still appealing to a somewhat xenophobic base. He made it obvious that it would be the Latino community whom Romney would sacrifice to look tough on some issues, such as SB 1070, his promised veto of the DREAM Act and his "Self-Deportation" policy for those valedictorians who were brought across the desert as babies.
The legislation from the right-wing of immigration politics has followed the rhetoric, with Alabama enacting even harsher anti-immigrant legislation than Arizona. This has cost the state nearly $11 billion dollars according to a study conducted by the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Alabama at a time when states are desperate for revenue.
It is no surprise that the Latino community has overwhelmingly voiced their lack of support for Mitt Romney, the current leader of the GOP, with recent polls from the Wall Street Journal placing him at 26 percent with Latinos. With institutions like the Supreme Court joining the political arena, it is more important than ever that the American public, specifically the Latino community, be informed, unified, and empowered, pushing for an immigration narrative which is supportive of compromise and solutions.
While Chief Justice John Roberts ended the court's term on a delicate environment of objectivity by upholding the Affordable Care Act, the umpire-like image of the Supreme Court has been undermined by credible charges of partisanship. Justice Robert will have another opportunity to determine the direction of the Court in the next term as they plan to delve into more politically charged issues, such as affirmative action. But only when Justice Roberts brings his team of umpires, specially Scalia, out of the batting cage (or the campaign trail) can the American public again have faith in the highest court of the land.
Follow Cesar Vargas on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@drmcapitolgrou
Of course illegals dont want citizenship. Its not their priority.
And OF COURSE they want entitlements when the economy is in a bad shape.
What I dont get is how the GOP-Tea tries to tie this to young people who only wish to contribute to soeciety, and do the exact opposite of all the above.
And since the average redneck nowadays never question and follow the holy grail that is Fox News, and since Republicans have filibustered more than 90% of proposals to make Obama look bad because they hate seeing non-whites accomplish anything, the lives of these innocent young adults with so much potential is a political football of wanton decadence.
come one, come all , right ?
there are billions of kids, all over the world, that would love to come here and get an education , gratis. what makes our friends from south of the border unique ? geographic proximity ?
i guess the dream act is their reward for having parents that committed a federal misdemeanor in a neighboring country. if I committed a federal misdemeanor in old mexico , it would be a while before i would see the light of day .
You reflect exactly the froward attitudes of the GOP.
Common sense - we can't afford to send LEGAL immigrants and our own citizens to college so how can we afford to send ILLEGAL ALIENS?
Common sense - LEGAL immigrants and CITIZENS need the jobs that ILLEGAL ALIENS are taking.
The "right thing to do" is to DEPORT ALL ILLEGAL ALIENS no matter where they come from, what color they are, what language they speak, who they are related to, who they work for, how old they are, how long they have lived here, how smart they are, or how many good deeds they have done.
That's common sense!
Inaccurate quotation and an incorrect reference. He never said "a model for the nation". He said "a model in Arizona" but in reference to a different Arizona law which relates to employment verification. Play the video at the link you provide and see for yourself.
The DREAM Act advocates think that 16 year olds have NO recollection or ties to their native countries. They also think that gang bangers should stay here too along with the few valedictorians. Incredible!
Thanks!
The only part of immigration law that is really broken is enforcement. And without enforcement, all other discussions are moot.
and it will continue forever because it comes in very handy every election year.
Our laws are clear and the only part that is really broken is enforcement - but you knew that, otherwise they woudl not still be here.
So be careful what you wish for - because I believe you are now getting it in the form of the official push-back. SB1070, HB56 are scenes from forthcoming attractions in other states. Even President Obama is bound to enforce the laws as written, which means he could not unilaterally give amnesty to dreamers - only defer deportation proceedings.
As with Wisconsin, the liberal media will continue to pass out the koolaid and tell you that the polls show that things are going the way you want so desperately to believe they are. But in the end the will of the majority will win out. Obama is already seeing it in the fact that the people that voted him in have been badly burned and so are simply not showing up this time round. So yes - thankfully it IS and election year and we can finally get things moving to sort this mess out!
Facts -
1. It costs on average across this country $15,000 per student per year. The children of illegals (anchors included) cost far more on average because they are low income and many don't speak english or speak it poorly.
2. Their parents are always low income and pay little or nothing towards that $15,000 ++ per year they are costing other taxpayers.
3. The two facts above mean that if those children of illegals were gone then districts with illegals would have massive amounts they could spend for students who are not the children of unwanted trespassers.
Would it be nice and warm and fuzzy if this country could just hold hands with the 2-3 BILLION children on this planet and educate them all? Yes. Would the costs be more for one year of doing so then this country has produced in total gross production in decades? Yes.
So even you will have to admit we can't educate all the children of the world. So why on earth if we have to limit some would we allow these children of illegals to stay?
Limited resources should be used to educate those who have a legal right to be in this country.