State Senate Takes a Page from George Wallace Playbook

Image

George Wallace, the longest-serving Democrat governor ever, standing against desegregation while being confronted by U.S. Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach at the University of Alabama in 1963 in an issue of Federal Supremacy.

According to a statement issued by the Massachusetts GOP, the Massachusetts State Senate has advanced its version of the “Protect Act,” a measure designed to restrict federal immigration enforcement by ICE, while disregarding a major Supreme Court ruling that affirms federal supremacy in immigration matters.

“By moving forward with the Protect Act, Massachusetts lawmakers are directly challenging the federal government’s role in immigration enforcement, a principle upheld by the Supreme Court in a case brought by President Obama’s own Justice Department,” said Massachusetts Republican National Committeewoman Janet Fogarty.

In its landmark 2012 decision in Arizona v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the federal government holds primary authority over immigration enforcement. The Court struck down several key provisions of Arizona’s SB 1070, determining that states cannot create or enforce local immigration laws that conflict with or undermine federal policy.

The Obama Administration’s Department of Justice initiated the lawsuit, successfully arguing that Arizona’s law violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution by attempting to establish state-level immigration policies at odds with federal authority.

According to the GOP statement, the advancement of the Protect Act raises serious questions about its compatibility with established federal law and precedent, potentially setting the stage for further legal challenges.

But others are pleased. According to State House News, Immigrant advocates, who have been pushing the bill, could be heard singing throughout the State House while senators debated. Several erupted in cheers from the Senate gallery when the vote on the bill was announced. 

The measure is reportedly being examined now by a joint senate-house committee.

I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive