By Laura Ingraham
A huge ruling today handed down by the justices on SB 1070, Arizona's immigration enforcement law. That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points" memo.
Already President Obama and Governor Romney are using it to stoke up their bases, no surprise there. Now, to recap, the law had four main components. Three parts that set up state criminal penalties for immigration violations were struck down.
Justice Kagan recused herself but the remaining eight justices upheld the provision allowing police to check the status of those that they had reasonable suspicion were in the country illegally and then report their identity to the feds.
Then it would be up to the federal government to pick up and deport the illegal aliens or let them go free. Now, considering the President's recent no deportation order for the under 30 crowd, expect more of a catch and release response.
In his majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy sounded more like President Obama than Oliver Wendell Holmes. He wrote that, quote, "Discretion in the enforcement of immigration law embraces immediate human concerns."
Well, Arizona 400,000 illegal immigrants must be thrilled that the majority of justices on the Supreme Court are empathizing with their plight. But no such empathy for the millions of Arizonans whose lives have been adversely impacted by the glut and cheap labor, increased crime, property damage and of course, strained social services all due to illegal immigration.
Now, in his dissent, Justice Scalia maintained that Arizona was merely trying to protect its inherent right of sovereignty. Not in contradiction of federal law, but in complete compliance with it. Thus, enforcing immigration law more effectively than Washington does.
Now, the fact is for decades, both the Republican and Democrat presidents have been unwilling to remedy the problem of illegal immigration which is why Arizona was forced to act. A Rasmussen poll earlier this year showed that 59 percent of Americans think that controlling our borders is more important than legalizing illegal aliens.
Our border today remains porous which is unconscionable post 9/11 and especially when our economy is limping along at about two percent GDP.
Today, the will of the people was thwarted once again by a Supreme Court that misapplies principles of pre-emption and dismisses the basic right of state sovereignty.
While our media has largely focused on the anger of Latino voters this election year the real and under-reported anger out there is felt by hard- working Americans of all ethnic backgrounds who want the borders enforced and our laws upheld.
And that's "The Memo"
Pinhead & Patriots
Justin Bieber was on "The Late Show" the other night, and he was defending his brand-new -- tell me it's not true -- tattoo, when this happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST, CBS'S "THE LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": Your mom can't be pleased with the tattoos?
JUSTIN BIEBER, SINGER: Mom, you know, she...
LETTERMAN: Does Mom have a tattoo?
BIEBER: She didn't...
LETTERMAN: No, I didn't think so. Does Dad have a tattoo?
LETTERMAN: Oh. Do me a favor. Don't go nuts. You know?
BIEBER: No, I won't.
LETTERMAN: Because more and more you see like the mural and the -- like the Sistine Chapel and the -- you know, it's too much.
BIEBER: I'm not going for the Sixteenth Chapel.
LETTERMAN: Canadian high school.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
INGRAHAM: Ouch. Well, Bieber probably should have known better, but was Letterman a "Pinhead" or "Patriot" for teasing him that way? We'll let you decide.
Remember, Mark Wahlberg, I believe, said no more - no tattoos for his kids. He had a different view on that.