Freedom Line Blog

A hat tip to Michelle Malkin’s indispensable web site for this jaw-dropping report. It turns out that the Obama administration is encouraging the national immigration service to exercise “prosecutorial discretion” in order NOT to deport illegal aliens if, among other reasons, they are involved in a fight for union privileges.

To avoid deterring individuals from reporting crimes and from pursuing actions to protect their civil rights, ICE officers, special agents, and attorneys are reminded to exercise all appropriate discretion on a case-by-case basis when making detention and enforcement decisions in the case of victims of crime, witnesses to crime, and individuals pursuing legitimate civil rights complaints. Particular attention should be paid to:…. individuals engaging in a protected activity related to civil or other rights (for example, union organizing or complaining to authorities about employment discrimination or housing conditions)….

Holy Union Thuggery, Batman!!!  Since when is “union organizing” a “right” for somebody who isn’t even a citizen or legal resident of the United States?!?  Break our laws by violating our borders, stay here illegally, and start agitating for union representation against your employer, and suddenly you are untouchable! You’re now a protected class of lawbreaker. Nice deal, eh? What’s next — forgiveness in American courts for all breaking-and-entering offenses as long as the violator is in favor of card check?

Words fail. This administration now is managing to combine two of its pernicious initiatives, amnesty and feathering the nests of union bosses, in one fell swoop. Unionizing is now equated with a civil right; lawlessness is now a “discretionary” concept. This should be all over the front pages of all the big papers; it should lead the nightly newscasts; it should be the subject of congressional hearings — and it should get people fired, because it is an abomination.

Below is one of the latest cartoons from Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.

View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.

Senators Jim DeMint (R-SC) and David Vitter (R-LA) today introduced an amendment that would prohibit the Obama Administration, including the Department of Justice and other federal agencies, from participating in lawsuits seeking to invalidate Arizona’s tough new immigration law.

In announcing the introduction of the amendment, Senator DeMint stated:

States like Arizona shouldn’t be prosecuted for protecting their citizens when the federal government fails to do so.  The federal government is rewarding illegal behavior and encouraging many more to enter our nation illegally when they refuse to enforce our laws. States along the border are facing kidnappings, drug trafficking, human trafficking and gang violence and they have a duty to keep their residents safe. Instead of suing states for doing his job, the President should get serious and stop holding border security hostage to pass amnesty and score points with his liberal base.”

Senator Vitter, who is chairman of the U.S. Senate Border Security Caucus, commented:

The state of Arizona is simply taking responsibility for a problem that the federal government has neglected for years, but Washington’s only response is to oppose these new enforcement efforts and take them to court.  The Obama administration should not use taxpayers’ money to pay for these lawsuits that the American people overwhelmingly oppose.”

According to a statement released by Senator DeMint’s office, the “amendment (#4464) could be voted on next week as part of the debate on the small business bill on the Senate floor.”

With apologies to Texas, Don’t Mess with Arizona!  One of the state’s utilities commissioners sent an open letter to the Mayor of Los Angeles in response to the City Council’s resolution to boycott Arizona businesses in order to, as the mayor said, “send a message” that L.A. officials disapprove of Arizona’s tough new illegal immigration law. (pdf)

Commissioner Gary Pierce’s letter is short and powerful. (pdf)  My favorite excerpt:

“I received your message; please receive mine.  As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona’s electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the ‘resources and ties’ we share with the City of Los Angeles.  In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation.  I am confident that Arizona’s utilities would be happy to take these electrons off your hands.  If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona’s economy.”

Like the well-heeled college students protesting capitalism on spring break, it’s time for Los Angeles officials to put their principles where their sanctimonious mouths are.  We’ll see who backs down first.

Below is one of the latest cartoons from Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.

View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.

He is if he’s guilty of pre-judging the constitutionality and effect of Arizona’s new immigration law, Senate Bill 1070, before even reading it.  When asked at a House Judiciary Committee hearing whether he’d read the law he’s criticized repeatedly, the U.S. Attorney General responded, “I have not had a chance to – I’ve glanced at it.”

Granted, reading 17 pages of legislation is a bit dry; so if the AG is looking for a Cliff Notes summary moved along by some punchy writing, I humbly suggest this piece.

H/T: Fox News

Sports and politics have once again collided.  Responding to a protest of sorts by the NBA’s Phoenix Suns, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer penned a special to ESPN.com disputing misinformation about SB 1070.  The governor took the unusual step because of calls for boycotting Arizona-based sports events, among other venues.

Along with a few purple prose moments with sports metaphors, Brewer lays out the hard facts about the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws.  In 2009, there were 316 kidnappings in Phoenix, making it the nation’s kidnapping capitol.  Today, there are approximately 6,000 prisoners in Arizona who are foreign nationals costing state taxpayers roughly $150 million a year.

Getting back to the boycott issue, Governor Brewer makes an assertion no one can reasonable disagree with:

A boycott that would actually improve border security would be to boycott illegal drugs. Dramatically less drug use and production would do wonders for the safety of all our communities.

We’ll see how that goes over.

Apparently, President Obama’s penchant for dithering is contagious.  Solicitor General and potential Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan has failed to respond to the Court’s request for a brief describing the Administration’s view on another Arizona immigration law.  (This one fines employers for hiring illegal immigrants.)  Now that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is fast-tracking an appeal of the Grand Canyon State’s newest attempt to enforce federal law, Kagan very likely won’t be able to ignore taking a side.

Surprisingly, though, the former Dean of Harvard Law School has written or said scarcely anything about law in her two decades as a legal academic.  From the L.A. Times Supreme Court reporter David Savage:

She does not have a record as a judge or legal advocate, and she did not write widely on legal topics, potentially making it difficult for Republicans to oppose her if she is nominated.

Shouldn’t such a statement knock her out of contention?

So far, all we know about Kagan is that she has establishment Ivy League credentials, holds fashionable elite positions, knows the right people, and is a member of a favored Democratic minority group.  Apart from a vague reputation as a “consensus builder” at Harvard, she barely has a year under her belt as an appellate advocate.  Isn’t it a little early to promote her?

C’mon; it’s not like she’s running for President of the United States – this is important!