Explosive new evidence shows ruling of AZ judge illegal

[Peter]

Conservative Examiner


http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m7d31-Ex...

July 31, 10:07 AM

Anthony G. Martin

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the
ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning
its new immigration law is illegal.

(Daniel Bayer/CBS News via Getty Images). The inept U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,

"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it.
Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this
lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our
Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

"Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original
Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court
shall have appellate Jurisdiction."

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution
makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings
that involve a state.

This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to
rule on the issue.

Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.

The attorney whose heads-up thinking concerning the Constitution provides the legal remedy for dealing with this blatant disregard for
Constitutional law in the article at Canada Free Press, which can be
accessed at the link above.

In a related development, another explosive discovery was made by those who actually take the Constitution seriously. The Constitution specifically allows
an individual state to wage war against a neighboring country in the
event of an invasion, should there be a dangerous delay or inaction on
the part of the federal government. This information was cited by United
Patriots of America.

From Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution, we find these words: "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, engage in War, unless actually invaded,
or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

No one who is actually familiar with the crisis at the southern border can deny that Arizona is endangered by the relentless assault of lawless
Mexican invaders who ignore our laws, inundate our schools and medical
facilities with unpaid bills, and even endanger the very lives of
citizens with criminal drug cartels that engage in kidnapping, murder,
human trafficking, and other mayhem, including aiming missile and
grenade launchers directly at U.S. border cities from just across the
Mexican border.

This is every bit as much of an invasion as the nation of Iran sending in a fleet of warships to the Port of Charleston.

The Constitution that forms the basis of the rule of law in this country says that Arizona has legal right to protect itself in the case of inaction or delay on the part of
the federal government, including waging war in its self-defense.

This, when coupled with the clear Constitutional mandate that only the Supreme Court hear cases involving the states, should be ample legal
basis for attorneys representing Arizona to go after the federal
government with a vengeance.

Governor Jan Brewer and the stalwart members of the Arizona legislature have ample legal reason to stand firm against the illegal bullying of an arrogant,
lawless federal government.

[Faith 1]

I sent this out a couple days ago and have been wondering when media and others will catch up to it and see what this truly means. This is why AZ is prepared and welcoming to Supreme Court. However, I am concerned with the Supreme court these days as well. Time will tell and it can take literally years before it makes its way through the appeal and then on to Supreme ruling.
http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/arizona-judge-susa...

[Lenice Moynihan]

Praise God that someone is finally doing something for all this Unconstitutional stuff. WE have got to keep praying!

[Sue Colaluca]

It is abominable. I thought Obama himself was supposed to be an authority on con-law. Apparently not.

I am tired of this "lawless" Administration.

[Sue Colaluca]

Just tweeted and FB'd this. Got a bunch of responses. Many people are sending the info to Gov. Brewer! Got to love the Canadian Free Press.

[Laura]

I actually mailed Brewer this info yesterday

[Amy J]

Comment by Amy J just now Delete Comment I don't for one second think that Holder and Obama didn't know about this, or for that matter the rest of the attorneys working on the case. The only people who didn't were average Americans, who didn't spend 8 years in law school on the off chance that we'd have a constitutional crisis in the nation.

Geez, good thing we all found out about this right AFTER Bolton heard the case. Not that this wouldn't have been good to know the minute the federal government slapped AZ with the lawsuit. The timing is suspect. Get us running after something and taking our eyes off the issue.......

It's true that this administration may win by just exhusting us all to death the cat and mouse games.

[Peter]

I did correspond with a constitutional attorney that spoke to one of our groups and she said that this original jurisdiction thing is not as cut and dried as the CFP article makes it out to be. I hope the CFP is right though. I wish this case had gone straight to the SCOTUS.