There seems to be nothing that will persuade President Obama to get off the dime and do something to secure the nation’s borders. However, one thing he is quick to do is sue states for the crime of attempting to deal with the illegal immigration problem on their own. You’d think he’s be happy to let states deal with the problem since this frees up more federal resources which he can then use to travel the country campaigning for re-election at taxpayer expense. But no, Obama can’t help doing all he can to maintain the nation’s porous border so that
potential Democrat voters illegal immigrants can continue streaming across unabated.
Obama’s preferred method, of course, is to sue those states with the audacity to want to enforce the immigration laws he refuses to. Following his lawsuits against Arizona and Alabama, Obama yesterday dispatched his ethically challenged Attorney General, Eric Holder, to sue South Carolina and Nikki Haley for their necessary attempt to enforce the law he refuses to, via Fox News:
The federal government filed a lawsuit Monday seeking to stop implementation of South Carolina’s tough new immigration law, arguing that the legislation that requires law officers to check suspects’ immigration status is unconstitutional.
Federal officials and state officials had met to discuss the issue a week ago.
The government wants a judge to stop enforcement of the legislation, which requires that officers call federal immigration officials if they suspect someone is in the country illegally following a stop for something else, U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles told The Associated Press.
"The Department of Justice has many important tasks," Nettles said. "Two of those important tasks are the defense of the constitution and ensuring equality is afforded to all."
The lawsuit filed in federal court names Gov. Nikki Haley as a defendant. A spokesman for the Republican, the daughter of immigrants from India, said the state was forced to pass its own law because there is no strong federal immigration law.
"If the feds were doing their job, we wouldn’t have had to address illegal immigration reform at the state level," Rob Godfrey said. "But, until they do, we’re going to keep fighting in South Carolina to be able to enforce our laws."
If the Obama Administration would put as many resources into border security as, say, politically connected companies via crony capitalism, states like South Carolina and Arizona wouldn’t have to take matters into their own hands. But this is the reality they face in the Age of Obama and they really have no choice. And South Carolina won’t be the last state Obama sues, as at least three others are in the crosshairs:
Assistant attorney general Tony West said Monday the agency continues to review similar laws in Utah, Indiana and Georgia.
None of this would be necessary if Obama would simply do his job, as Governor Palin admonished last year when she stood shoulder to shoulder with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer in support of Arizona’s effort to stop illegal immigration:
Unfortunately, don’t expect any meaningful action on border security as long as this Administration is in power. Yesterday, Obama’s Homeland Security chief offered a novel reason for preventing the South Carolina law from going into effect:
In a news release, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said South Carolina’s law "diverts critical law enforcement resources from the most serious threats to public safety and undermines the vital trust between local jurisdictions and the communities they serve, while failing to address the underlying problem: the need for comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level."
Got it. We can’t have states using their resources to help secure the border because that would mean that the woefully inadequate amount of federal resources we’re currently using would have to be increased when what we really need is amnesty so we don’t have to use any resources at all. I certainly feel better knowing we have an individual of such brilliance in charge of homeland security. How about you?