Sponsored by

Note: This story is more than 3 years old.

Grijalva statement on SB 1070 Supreme Court case

U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva released this statement Wednesday afternoon, following the U.S. Supreme Court hearing on the constitutionality of Arizona's SB 1070 immigration crackdown law:

Two years ago, Gov. Jan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law and set a political fire that we've seen spread across the country. We've seen firsthand the humanitarian and economic injustices SB 1070 has caused – the harassment and profiling of those who appear 'foreign,' the unjustified separation of families, and the devastation of our local and regional economy.

Those who support SB 1070 need to consider what's truly at stake in this case. The issue here is not just immigration. A federal government that lacks supremacy over the states when setting national policy is a federal government that, in many ways, has ceased to exist. If the Supreme Court upholds this law, supporters have to wonder what's next. Will states be able to set their own foreign policy? Will Arizona be able to sign binding trade agreements directly with Mexico, without federal involvement? Is that a Pandora's box we really want to break open?

The Supreme Court today has a heavy responsibility to provide unity and clarity for the country after so much national division and vitriol. The simple fact is that passing SB 1070 chipped away at the Constitution, our national unity, and our common sense of justice. Congress has clear constitutional authority in setting immigration policy. The Supreme Court should recognize that authority – doing otherwise threatens more than just Arizona, or any one community. It threatens the ideals of federal democracy that have held strong since the founding of this country.

- 30 -
have your say   

3 comments on this story

May 1, 2012, 11:02 pm
-0 +0

I agree Bret!

Apr 25, 2012, 12:21 pm
-1 +5

You know what Grijalva, if you’re not too busy boycotting the Sentinel and read these comments, perhaps you can point to what exactly the federal law is that 1070 is supposedly conflicting with.

You can’t do it, can you?

Apr 25, 2012, 12:15 pm
-1 +5

Congress has clear constitutional authority in setting immigration policy.

First, Grijalva needs to learn how to read. Then, once he has that down, he should read 1070. If his comprehension skills are also developed by the time he gets around to reading 1070, he will understand that 1070 does not set any immigration policies…its mandate is to merely enforce the policies that the federal government sets. But, since Grijalva didn’t read the law he wouldn’t know that…or perhaps he does know that, but doesn’t want to anger his border-jumper voters.

Grijalva is an idiot, and in many ways a hypocrite. I don’t take him seriously, and neither does any other logical, independent thinking person.

When it comes to immigration policy, it’s this simple…either enforce the laws on the books, or change them. Having laws that are not enforced is senseless and hypocritical. Having laws that are selectively enforced is a blatant Sixth Amendment violation.

If the feds don’t want Arizona enforcing their immigration policy (whatever that may be), then they should change the policy to something they can live with actually being enforced.

Sorry, we missed your input...

You must be logged in or register to comment


news, politics & government, border, crime & safety, local, arizona, opinion, nation/world, mexico/latin america, breaking

TucsonSentinel.com publishes analysis and commentary from a variety of community members, experts, and interest groups as a catalyst for a healthy civic conversation; we welcome your comments. As an organization, we don't endorse candidates or back specific legislation. All opinions are those of the individual authors.