Arizona Immigration Law Supersedes Federal Law

The first time Arizona's governor and Obama met, this is how the conversation went over immigration.
The first time Arizona's governor and Obama met, this is how the conversation went over immigration.

The governor of Arizona is challenging President Obama's new immigration policy allowing those under 30, but educated in the US. These are about 70% from Mexico and their parents brought them across illegally at a young age but attended US schools and graduated from US high schools. The only difference is they were born in Mexico. Obama's policy is to allow them to get a two waiver to continue to go to school, work etc. It does not grant any rights or privileges, per se.

Arizona's governor has rebuked Federal law and has stated that in Arizona, there is NO such policy. Those who do meet the qualifications under the policy, will have to get the application and waiver, if approved, in another state. In other words, Arizona is making Federal law for its own State. Immigration is a Federal issue, although Arizona thinks otherwise. There is no question this challenge will end up in court. In the meantime, US Immigration in Arizona is at a quandary what to do. How can Arizona enforce its edict not to allow the policy to occur in offices of US Immigration? Will local police enter Federal buildings to prevent applications or block their entrances?

This time, I think Arizona's governor is wrong. Obama's policy is the right thing to do for those who have been here all of their lives, gone to US schools, speak fluent English, and are American except for the fact of where they were born.

More by this Author


Comments 10 comments

ib radmasters profile image

ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

This is giving reward for someone that committed a crime, and it is discriminatory against all those immigrants that legally tried to get into the country, but were turned down because of policy.

Obama interpretation is not what the law states, it is failure to enforce the laws as written.

I thought that George W Bush did a poor job of protecting our borders, but Obama beats him by a mile.

It is Mexico or whatever these illegals came from that is responsible for their needs. These people got free education, free medical from the US and maybe more But when you reward them, while you punish those that tried to come into the country legally, then that is just plain wrong. It is not Fair to those that tried to do the right thing.

Additionally, it is Arizona that is pulling the big weight here, not the United States. Immigration is a federal policy, but when the state is in jeopardy or in financial trouble and the government won't do their job, someone has to do it.

So unless you have a more compelling argument on the subject, I don't agree with you on this issue.


perrya profile image

perrya 4 years ago Author

That is fine, because, I disagree. The kids of the parents that crossed illegally are the innocent victims that spent their lives here and are American as most. They had no choice. The parents would not qualify for this policy because they are too old. They should be deported. The kids, now teens or in college are american.


ib radmasters profile image

ib radmasters 4 years ago from Southern California

PerryA

What about all those immigrants that spent money, and time trying to get into the country?

They are not Americans, they are illegal aliens.

Why should we support them instead of spending the money that we spent on them, to American Citizens.

Not a compelling argument from you.


Johnkadu123 profile image

Johnkadu123 4 years ago from Toronto, Canada

I understand that these were children who were brought in by their parents and in any case could not have committed a crime since they were underage anyway at the time of the crime. The GOP is really writing its political suicide note on this one. If the Latinos continue to perceive that the party is out to get them then in 20 years time, they will begin to lose even Texas. In any case South America is developing at such a fast rate that it is not inconceivable that in the future the immigration will be towards the other side. Thanks for a great hub and I agree with your stance.


SassySue1963 4 years ago

Sorry, but Obama's executive order does not supersede Federal law. What they are receiving are "conditional" VISAs. It does not make the citizens nor legal aliens. It simply delays deportation and the enforcement of Federal law for these select few. Therefore, they are not entitled to these things. However, what was said concerning this bothered me more than either action. That apparently visitors here are entitled to benefits from our tax dollars? I'm still researching it but that is what they are trying to claim.


swordsbane 4 years ago

First of all, State law is SUPPOSED to supercede federal law in all things that do not pertain to the Constitution (ie those things that could be considered uncpnstitutional by the Supreme court) this means that Arizona is within it's rights to say that this Federal law doesn't apply to them. California did the same thing with marijuana and it stuck. End of story. That having been said, think they have been doing their reputation abroad no favors by their stance on immigration. Anyone should be allowed into this country who can pull their own weight (pay taxes, geta minimum wage job, speak English, etc)everything else is just people jealous because THEY can't pull their weight, or think they deserve more than they're getting, or people too terrified of terrorism to have a rationl thought.


perrya profile image

perrya 4 years ago Author

I thought that the borders of the US are federal jurisdiction and they protect them, not the State, which I think is correct. Of course, once the border is crossed, is immigration rights still Federal and not State? or vice versa? The State should be able to say where and who gets its support. Yet, there are Federal offices in all states and this is where this group will go to file their applications, pay $450 for a conditional visa for 2 years, if proof is shown they graduated from US high school, no criminal record, working. As for those not of this group, they are SOL, one has to draw a line in the sand somewhere. The under 30 group have spent nearly all their lives in the US, not so with others.


SassySue1963 4 years ago

@perrya What about the over 30 group? I find it odd to draw the line at 30 and then use the premise that "this is the only country they've ever known". Those above aged 30 have been here longer and would have a much harder time starting over in a country they have never ever known. I know why 30 is the cap. I wonder, what are your thoughts on that?


perrya profile image

perrya 4 years ago Author

It is a valid question and why the age cutoff is 30 is maybe to limit the numbers? Yeah, I can see many getting angry over this, more so if you are 33.


SassySue1963 4 years ago

Honestly, my personal thoughts on this issue is to strengthen the borders, strengthen enforcement of existing immigration laws, give more power to the State level here and then do another amnesty program like during Reagan for those already here.

However, amnesty does not work if it is not coupled with a valid and real program to prevent the flood of illegal immigrants into the country.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working