The rock is Arizona voters, whom are solidly standing behind the immigration law, by 70 percent of likely voters, to stop illegal entry and illegal residence in Arizona by criminals that cross our borders illegally.
The hard place is the Democrat's hard line against Arizona's new law, one to which if Arizona Democrats follow, they are assured no chance to be reelected, yet at some point during their campaigning, especially if the Obama administration tries to argue against in court, those Democrats will have to publicly take a stance.
This leads the The Hill's report showing that Arizona Democrats are telling Barack Obama, in no uncertain terms, to do his job in securing the border and not get into a court battle over the issue.
Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.) on Monday sent a sharply worded letter to President Barack Obama urging him not to sue.
“I believe your administration’s time, efforts and resources would be much better spent securing the border and fixing our broken immigration system,” the two-term congressman wrote in the letter. “Arizonans are tired of the grandstanding, and tired of waiting for help from Washington. … [A] lawsuit won’t solve the problem. It won’t secure the border, and it won’t fix our broken immigration system.”
Two other vulnerable Democrats have come out publicly against the news that the Obama administration plans to file a lawsuit:
This week Mitchell was joined by two other vulnerable Democrats in expressing public opposition to the administration’s legal strategy. Reps. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.) are also urging the administration to reconsider its suit.
“Congresswoman Giffords wants more federal agents on the Arizona border, not federal lawyers in court arguing with state lawyers about a law that will do nothing to increase public safety in the communities she represents,” C.J. Karamargin, a spokesman for the congresswoman, told The Hill.
Kirkpatrick likewise said the administration should focus on border security.
“I am calling on the president and the attorney general to abandon preparations for a lawsuit against Arizona, and to recommit to finding a national solution to fixing this national problem,” the freshman lawmaker said in a statement released Monday. “The administration should focus on working with Arizona to put together a long-term strategy to secure our borders and reform our immigration policy. … The time for talk is over, and the time for action is here.”
The article also points out that if Obama goes ahead with his plan to file, it would make it very difficult for those vulnerable Democrats to utilize him for fundraisers and such, because being seen with Obama would be their death knell in the voting booths come November.
Oh, and as a side note, one lawsuit already filed has an interesting legal brief attached, from Mexico, which is amusing to say the least, since it is Mexico's incompetence that has caused the constant illegal border crossings, sending drug traffickers, kidnappers and other violent criminals into the US along with ordinary criminals that cross the border illegally.
The hypocrisy of that is astounding considering Mexico's own illegal immigration laws and penalties.
Article 34 states "The Ministry of the Interior may lay to foreigners who enter the country, conditions it deems appropriate regarding the activities they will pursue, and the location or places of residence. Also ensure that immigrants are useful elements for the country and that have the income needed for sustenance and where appropriate, of persons under their economic dependence."
The article of Mexican law that shows the most extreme hypocrisy of Mexico in relation to their filing a legal brief as an attachment to any lawsuit against Arizona law, is Article 73:
The authorities which by law have federal forces under their command, local or municipales, shall assist the immigration authorities at their request, to enforce the provisions of this Act.
Exactly what Arizona's law does.
Other articles to note would be 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 125, 128... take special note of article 138.
.
