UPDATED: Spite, vote-pandering, or both?

(EDITED TO ADD:  See the update at the foot of the article.)


I note that yesterday, after the Supreme Court upheld a core component of Arizona's anti-illegal-immigrant legislation (while striking down most of it), the Obama administration appeared to retaliate against the state.

The Obama administration said Monday it is suspending existing agreements with Arizona police over enforcement of federal immigration laws, and said it has issued a directive telling federal authorities to decline many of the calls reporting illegal immigrants that the Homeland Security Department may get from Arizona police.

Administration officials, speaking on condition they not be named, told reporters they expect to see an increase in the number of calls they get from Arizona police — but that won’t change President Obama’s decision to limit whom the government actually tries to detain and deport.

“We will not be issuing detainers on individuals unless they clearly meet our defined priorities,” one official said in a telephone briefing.

. . .

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Arizona may not impose its own penalties for immigration violations, but it said state and local police could check the legal status of those they have reasonable suspicion to believe are in the country illegally.

That means police statewide can immediately begin calling to check immigration status — but federal officials are likely to reject most of those calls.

Federal officials said they’ll still perform the checks as required by law but will respond only when someone has a felony conviction on his or her record. Absent that, ICE will tell the local police to release the person.

There's more at the link.

This is merely the latest expression of contempt by the Obama administration for the rule of law.  Don't like a Supreme Court decision?  Withhold the Federal law enforcement assistance needed to implement it.  Don't like an entirely legitimate Congressional inquiry into a program that's caused the death of at least two federal law enforcement officers and over three hundred people in Mexico?  Slap an 'executive privilege' stamp on critical documents and refuse to hand them over.  Need votes?  Appease part of the electorate by implementing a de facto amnesty for certain illegal immigrants by instructing a Federal law enforcement agency not to apply certain laws that affect them.  Want to please your union backers?  Award the unions almost everything they ask for whilst victimizing other stakeholders in a massive bailout program.

I'm beginning to wonder how to distinguish the Obama administration from a gang of white-collar criminals.  The RICO statute certainly appears relevant to both organizations!  On the other hand, the same could be said for many other administrations from both parties.  I fear neither Democrats nor Republican occupants of the White House can be trusted to always put the nation's interests ahead of their own partisan political positions.  Unfortunately, that means we all lose.

Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  Jim March added a very interesting comment to this post.  I've known Jim online for many years.  He's a solid citizen, and has a long track record of fighting for voting rights and against electoral manipulation.  He's provided a completely different perspective on the Arizona issue, which is new to me (and, I'm sure, to many outside Arizona).  I honestly don't know if he's right, particularly because his perspective hasn't been documented by many of the sources I trust and respect:  but I do trust and respect Jim.  If he says this, I'm willing to listen.  Here's a sample of what he has to say (I've added links to the names for more information).

There is a major trend towards anti-Latino racism in Arizona law enforcement. It comes from the top - meaning Joe Arpaio (aka "the waddling civil rights violation"), AG Tom Horne (previously banned from the stock market for life) and former top legislator (Senate Majority Leader) Russell Pearce.

Pearce is...extra special, even by AZ standards. He was recently recalled and fired from the legislature by popular vote. Why? He was Mormon and represented a strongly Mormon area (Mesa, a very right-leaning suburb of Phoenix). Pierce brought his best friend into the Mormon church, a guy name of JT Ready. He then got Ready promoted to Elder. And then the Mormon leadership in that area found out Ready was a full-on Nazi - I mean complete with wearing swastikas, stiff-armed salutes, the whole nine yards. So the Mormons abandoned Pierce and sided with the "lefties" doing the recall drive...weirdest political alliance EVER.

There's much more in Jim's comment.  Go read, and judge for yourself.  If other AZ residents or those knowledgable about it will please add their views in Comments, I'll be grateful for your input.

Thanks, Jim!

Peter