Sponsored by

Comments on

Who won? Who’s talking? Both sides claim victory in SB 1070 ruling

In the flurry of statements following the high court’s much-anticipated ruling on SB 1070, no one admitted defeat. All claimed victory of some kind and most saw the decision as a step in the right direction. But with no referees to say for certain who won, victory is open to interpretation.... Read more»

have your say   

4 comments on this story

1
1181 comments
Jun 26, 2012, 10:16 am
-0 +0

Well, if both sides are happy about some things, and pissed off about others, then the court probably did it’s job.

With this flood of coverage, stories, and statements, I have yet to see something stating that, ultimately, this doesn’t change anything, for two reasons:

-A law like SB1070 isn’t going to keep border jumpers from jumping the border. If they disrespect our laws and our sovereignty before, then one more law isn’t gonna make a damn bit of difference to them.

-Where things also aren’t going to change is the way cops do business. For the most part, checking the immigration status of those they suspect are here illegally is what they’ve been doing for years. All SB1070 did was to take away the option of doing so and making it a requirement.

What SB1070 is, boiled down, is a political football. Both sides of the border issue are using it to get their names in the paper and further their agenda and get move votes for politicians which believe in their cause. Media outlets are using it because it’s controversial and sells more papers and gets more mouse clicks.

I’m a civic-minded guy who follows politics and current events, but even I am getting sick of this issue. I naively thought that the Supreme Court’s decision would finally get the open borders crowd to shut up so we can all move on with our lives. I thought they actually cared about saving face and maintaining dignity. I guess I should have known better.

2
72 comments
Jun 26, 2012, 10:27 am
-1 +1

I was naive too.  I thought the SCOTUS ruling would completely uphold the ideals of law agnostic to race, creed, culture, sex, and political affiliation, and the balanced application and enforcement of the law.  Whoopsie!!

3
1181 comments
Jun 26, 2012, 10:30 am
-1 +0

@janamg

Dont be so hard on yourself. Turns out, you were right. I guess you haven’t read the paper the last couple of days…

4
330 comments
Jun 26, 2012, 10:53 am
-0 +1

@Bret Linden


“Paper?” ; )

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment

Click to enlarge

Stephanie Snyder/Cronkite News Service

Even though the Supreme Court rejected three of the four provisions of SB 1070 it was presented, Gov. Jan Brewer called the court’s ruling a major victory for the state’s immigration law. She is shown in April outside the court.

Categories

news, politics & government, border, crime, local, arizona, opinion, analysis, breaking, Cronkite News Service
Sponsored by

Top Commenters

  • Bret Linden: 1181
  • Dylan Smith: 330
  • Roberto De Vido: 268
  • buddhaboy: 215
  • Quietwoman2: 172
  • Brittanicus: 157
  • Joan: 86
  • scar: 82
  • janamg: 72
  • azjimn2son: 63
Sponsored by

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you indepedent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.

Donate securely with PayPal

$5,000 Newshound
$2,500 Copy desk chief
$1,000 Trusted source
$500 Correspondent
$250 Stringer
$100 Cub reporter
$50 Printer's Devil
Enter your own amount (below)

OR: Subscribe and stretch your donation over time

$5/mo. Printer's Devil
$10/mo. Cub Reporter
$20/mo. Stringer
Enter your own monthly amount (number only)

TucsonSentinel.com is fiscally sponsored by the Investigative News Network. Your contribution is tax-deductible.

User Guidelines

Please be respectful and relevant. Thought-provoking. Or at least funny.

We want comments to advance the discussion and we need your help. Debate, disagree, yell (digitally) or laugh, but do it with respect.

We won't censor your comments if we don't agree with you; we want viewpoints from across the political spectrum. We're dedicated to sparking an open, active discussion. We believe people with differing opinions can spark debate and effect change.

Comments are open to registered users of TucsonSentinel.com.

Keep in mind:

  • A conversation involves sharing and respect. Support your viewpoint with facts, not attacks.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Remember that being part of a community requires tolerance for differing views.
  • We can't ensure that all comments are based in truth. The only comments we endorse are those we write ourselves.

TucsonSentinel.com does not allow:

  • Hate speech. Blatantly racist, sexist or homophobic slurs or calls for violence against a particular type of person, etc. will be removed.
  • Obscenity & excessive cursing. Sometimes a well-placed curse word - if you're creative enough to get it past our auto-censor - can express your point in just the right way. But we say '%*$& no' to cursing for cursing's sake. And lose the explicit sexually-descriptive language. It doesn't contribute to the debate and there are plenty of other places on the Internet to find it.
  • Flaming. During a heated discussion, unkind words may be spoken. We can live with a certain amount of rudeness in the name of provocative conversation, but a pattern of personal attacks (name-calling, mocking, or baiting) is not acceptable nor are threatening or harassing comments. Show some respect, please.
  • Spam. Solicitation of products or services isn't allowed; contact us about advertising, we'd love to talk to you. Links to off-topic sites may be deleted.
  • Copyright or IP infringement. Lengthy quotes and violations of 'Fair Use' aren't allowed. Anything you post should be your own work.
  • Overposting. Don't bore people and waste electrons with identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don't advance a conversation.
  • Trolling, sockpuppetry, and other abusive behavior. Please don't feed the trolls and don't pretend to be someone you're not.
  • Gossip. Don't bring up others who can't defend themselves. We don't give out personal information; you shouldn't either.

Comments that violate these guidelines may be removed. We reserve the right to make up the rules as we go along.

Flagging

Commentors are solely responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. Users who violate these standards may lose their privileges on TucsonSentinel.com.

Sentinel editors can't read every comment. Trolls, spammers and other troublemakers can slide under the bridge. We rely on you to help maintain a healthy conversation - more than likely, you're reading these comments before the editors.

What if you see something inappropriate? Use the 'Flag' button to send it to a moderation queue. Help us out and tell us why you're reporting it; please don't report someone just because you disagree with them. Boy who cried wolf and all that. We'll take appropriate action on violations.

We will not edit comments to alter their meaning or censor comments because of political content.

We will not remove comments solely because they are heartless, cruel, coarse, foolish or just plain wrong. Your disapproval can maintain a decent signal to noise ratio. Ultimately, however, self-policing is the best method.

Bottom line, don't be a jerk.

  • A
  • A
  • A
  •   Share:
  • more»
Show previews