Real News From The Blaze' Discusses AZ Immigration Law Heading to Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will continue to command mass media attention through the spring. After hearing arguments on Obamacare, the court will now take up Arizona's controversial immigration law, SB 1070, which requires police to check the legal status of those who they reasonably suspect are in the country illegally, and also requires legal immigrants to carry their papers with them at all times when in the state.  The Justice Department filed a lawsuit to overturn the law in July 2010, arguing that it interferes with the federal government’s right to set immigration policy.

With Republican Arizona Governor Jan Brewer confident that the law will stand, Democrats are scrambling to put together legislation stripping states of the power to enact their own immigration rules should the Supreme Court rule in favor of the law. The Washington Times reports:

"Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, said his legislation would establish federal primacy in immigration by blocking states from taking any action. That would not only preclude state law enforcement efforts like the Arizona model now before the court, but also would overturn a Supreme Court ruling last year that upheld a different Arizona law requiring businesses to verify their workers’ legal status.

“I believe it is simply too damaging to our economy and too dangerous to our democracy to have 50 states doing 50 different things with regard to immigration policy,” said Mr. Schumer, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee, as  he convened a hearing on Arizona’s crackdown law, known as S.B. 1070."

Will Cain opened "Real News" Wednesday breaking down SB 1070, and why it is being heard before the Supreme Court.

"The role of race in this law is not what the Supreme Court heard arguments about today," Cain said. "What they heard arguments about today was over this concept of preemption. Who is allowed to enforce immigration laws?

"The federal government exclusively? Or federal and state governments together?"

Cain points out that the State of Arizona is arguing that they have crafted a law that does not trump, but essentially mirrors the federal government's immigration policy. The question is whether the state can enforce the law without the federal government.

"If state governments are forbidden from enforcing federal laws, who pulls you over on federal highways?" asked panelist Andrew Wilkow. "Is it the FBI?"

"I see it as the State of Arizona saying; we have a major problem on our hands--that's effecting our state disproportionately--and essentially what we need to do is do the job that you guys aren't doing already" added panelist Jedediah Bila. "So let us help you do it."