From the archive: This story is more than 10 years old.

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.
have your say   

4 comments on this story

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.

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!!

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


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

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

@Bret Linden

“Paper?” ; )

— 30 —


Best in Internet Exploder