The New York Times looks at today’s Supreme Court hearing on SB 1070:

Justices across the ideological spectrum appeared inclined to uphold a controversial part of Arizona’s aggressive 2010 immigration law, based on their questions on Wednesday at a Supreme Court argument.

“You can see it’s not selling very well,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a member of the court’s liberal wing and its first Hispanic justice, told Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr., referring to a central part of his argument.

Mr. Verrilli, representing the federal government, had urged the court to strike down part of the law requiring state law enforcement officials to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop if the officials have reason to believe that the person might be an illegal immigrant.

“Why don’t you try to come up with something else?” Justice Sotomayor asked Mr. Verrilli.

Talking Points Memo focuses on a particularly interesting detail about Justice Scalia’s line of questioning:

In his fervent defense Wednesday of Arizona’s right to crack down on illegal immigration, Justice Antonin Scalia likened immigration enforcement to crackdowns on bank robbers.

“What’s wrong about the states enforcing federal law?” Scalia said during his aggressive questioning of U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. “There is a federal law against robbing federal banks. Can it be made a state crime to rob those banks? I think it is.”

The Reagan-appointed justice mocked the Obama administration’s argument that S.B. 1070 unconstitutionally forces the federal government to re-prioritize its enforcement resources and go after undocumented people who are not dangerous.

“But does the attorney general come in and say, you know, we might really only want to go after the professional bank robbers?” Scalia said. “If it’s just an amateur bank robber, you know, we’re going to let it go. And the state’s interfering with our whole scheme here because it’s prosecuting all these bank robbers.”

Slate rounds up other coverage.

Getting hassled by The Man Mild-mannered reporter

6 replies on “Will SB 1070 Be Upheld by Supreme Court?”

  1. This so called “newspaper” and its writers are nothing more than propaganda trolls.
    Go to Mexico city where you would have more readers for your drival.

  2. American tea party: I gotta say that you appear to have brought a radical interpretation to the above text.

  3. Am. tea party this is not Seattle or San Fran.. this leftwing paper gets another view from the right 70-30 voted in Arizona 2 years ago to pass 1070 also the media (Tucson Weekly) should not always be so bias as not all your readers are not from the left…..

  4. Looks like Obama’s argument against SB 1070 is going down like Hillary Clinton on Antony Wiener’s wife. Nice try Communist. Sell this crap to RT, will you?

  5. SCOTUS will give us answers to all our burning questions soon. My bet is they
    will agree with the 9th district court. There will be no suprises.

    But the big suprise will be the ObamaCare Law…The supremes will dismiss this
    case without prejudice. Dismiss due to lack of adequate standing…due to
    lack of facts and evidences of actual damages to any individual…etc.

Comments are closed.