Police watch as opponents of Arizona's new immigration enforcement law gather outside the state capitol building.
(John Moore/Getty)
Today the Supreme Court will hear arguments in Arizona v. United States, the case that will decide the constitutionality of Arizona's controversial immigration law, SB 1070. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law in April 2010, and the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case in last December. Arizona argues that the federal government is not doing enough to prevent illegal immigration, and that states must therefore take matters into their own hands.
The Obama Administration believes that laws like SB 1070 preempt federal immigration laws, and that only the federal government can make immigration policy. Kris Kobach is the Secretary of State of Kansas and the architect of SB 1070, as well as immigration laws in Alabama, Utah, South Carolina and a number of other states. He argues that the immigration law signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996 allowed for state and local cooperation in immigration enforcement. The Obama Administration, Secretary Kobach believes, "has a tough job in this case because they’re basically saying, 'well that may be what the law says, but our policy in the Obama Administration is different.'"
Secretary Kobach is also an informal adviser to Mitt Romney Presidential Campaign. He insists that Romney is not "pivoting" on immigration as he enters the general election. "He was speaking to more than conservative Republicans [during the primary]," Secretary Kobach says. "He said on national television, in multiple debates, that he favors a policy encouraging aliens to self-deport."
Kambiz Hosseini: Iran's Jon Stewart on the Presidential Election
P is for Prison: Sesame Street and Overpopulation in America's Jails
Karzai Walks Away From Peace Talks, FEMA Flood Maps Have Big Consequences
Overpopulation of Prisons, The History of Privacy & Democracy, Will Snowden Be Extradited?
An Inside Look at The Largest Solar Boat Ever Built
The show is a co-production of WNYC Radio and Public Radio International, in collaboration with New York Times Radio and WGBH Boston.
Major funding provided by:
Comments [10]
If the High Court grants approval to Arizona in enforcing its policing statutes, then California better have control posts on their state border? As hundreds of thousand or even millions of illegal aliens are going to be fleeing to other states and not just to adjoining states, but any state that is pampering illegal aliens. I don't want my taxes paying for illegal alien welfare anymore, that’s why I joined the Monolithic TEA PARTY.
CNN? Si!
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-04-23/us/us_scotus-arizona-immigration-law_1_controversial-immigration-law-illegal-immigration-arrest-immigrants?_s=PM:US
PBS. They might give you a copy of the style manual for a pledge of $60.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/july-dec10/immigration_07-22.html
Media Matters; r u kidding?
http://mediamatters.org/research/201204240015
Yes, the Daily Beast has a style manual:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/24/supreme-court-takes-up-controversial-arizona-immigration-law.html
CBS got its copy of the style manual:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_162-57420718/supreme-court-takes-up-arizonas-controversial-immigration-law-requiring-police-to-check-residency/
HuffPo style manual, too:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/sb-1070-supreme-court-arizona-immigration-law_n_1451622.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D155174
Perhaps it is an NPR style manual thing:
http://www.npr.org/2012/04/25/151281643/controversial-arizona-law-reaches-supreme-court
Does WNYC have a style manual that requires everyone to call it "the Controversial Arizona Immigration Law"?
Because without there being a rule, no sensible reporter would repeatedly (almost without exception) continue to call it "the controversial... law." Unless, of course, those same reporters called it "The Controversial Affordable Care Act." But I haven't heard anyone at WNYC doing that.
It cannot be an accident. It must be deliberate. It is here, in print, on The Takeaway's website. Todd Zwillich used the word "controversial" more times than I could count.
I presume that there is some sort of talking points memo from whaever listserve that liberal media elites congregate on these days. Since the old listserve was outed and shut down. "Call it the 'controversial' law!" If I am wrong about that, The Takeaway's producers are free to straighten me out.
Jonh Hackenbarry did not question Secretary Kobach because he is not familiar with inmigrants. Once an inmigrant has been in this country a number of years he can not go back to his country because he is older and does have the skills and the resourses to survive in a poor country.
Leave a Comment
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.