Streams

Supreme Court Arizona Ruling

Monday, June 25, 2012

Police watch as opponents of Arizona's new immigration enforcement law gather outside the state capitol building. (John Moore/Getty)

In a ruling this morning, the Supreme Court struck down much of Arizona's controversial immigration policy (SB 1070), but also left the door open for one key provision -- police immigration status check of anyone stopped -- to remain and be litigated further. Melissa Keaney, staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, discusses the decision.

Guests:

Melissa Keaney
News, weather, Radiolab, Brian Lehrer and more.
Get the best of WNYC in your inbox, every morning.

Comments [6]

Appearance of Corruption WITHIN the Supreme Court?

The Citizen's United ruling asserts that large donations
do not even give the APPEARANCE of Corruption.

This is an empirical question - best answered by public POLLING.
Is there a Pew or Gallup poll asking US Citizens whether they
think that unlimited donations by companies corrupt or give
the appearance of corruption ? I'd bet a large plurality
(or even a majority) of US citizens think so. IF this is
the case, then the Supreme Court is demonstrably and EMPIRICALLY WRONG.

But a scarier question emerges : Have any of the members of the
Supreme Court accepted "soft bribes" - donations, investment tips,
generous speaker's fees, book deals, favorable loans, jobs or
other favors for family members or "significant others", or other relations which might give the "APPEARANCE of corruption" to reasonable Americans ?

If so, shouldn't these be HIGHLIGHTED PUBLICLY AND INVESTIGATED ?

If a majority of the Supreme Court sitll actually believes that
taking millions of dollars from wealthy individuals and corporate donors
doesnt even give the APPEARANCE of Corruption- PERHAPS IT'S BECAUSE
THEY ARE ALREADY GROSSLY CORRUPT THEMSELVES ???????

Brian - Please INVESTIGATE!

(It'd also be an interesting show - include Biographers of current
Supreme Court justices, NYU/Brennan Center academics re: the recent
Montana ruling, and Pew or Gallup poll representatives to estimate
WHAT % of US Citizens think that the current status quo under Citizen's United DOES - IN FACT- give rise to the appearance (or existance) of
corruption.) Proving corruption may be challenging - proving
the APPEARANCE of CORRUPTION is an EASY STRAIGHTFORWARD FACTUAL QUESTION.

IS the SCOTUS saying that a large plurality (or majority) of the US
population are NOT REASONABLE PERSONS ? (Otherwise they'd
have to admit that a Reasonable person would object).

HAVE MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME COURT PERSONALLY TAKEN "SOFT BRIBES"
for themselves, their family or friends ?

If so, this would explain their position.

If so :

IS THERE A LEGAL PROCESS TO IMPEACH A SUPREME COURT
JUSTICE WHO IS CORRUPT ?

Jun. 25 2012 04:53 PM
joe from nearby

@emjayay- Melissa Keaney sounds very adult. Your wise crack, on the other hand, makes you sound like a misogynistic dolt.

Jun. 25 2012 02:18 PM
emjayay from Brooklyn

Melissa Keaney, as an attorney and spokesperson or for that matter an adult in any professional job, should learn to speak like an adult. Continually going up at the end of sentences as if there is a question mark there does not add to anyone's credibility. It makes one sound weak and airheady and unsure about one's statements. High school girl/valley girl speech is for high school/valley girls. For your own good, grow up Melissa.

Jun. 25 2012 11:55 AM
Lenore from Manhattan

If the Chief Justice had voted with the conservatives, the vote would have been 4-4. In that case, would the previous court ruling stand?

Jun. 25 2012 11:47 AM

Another POV on the decision:

Most of Arizona Immigration Law Preempted
http://www.volokh.com/2012/06/25/most-of-arizona-immigration-law-preempted/

Jun. 25 2012 11:36 AM
jawbone

From what the guest is saying, it sounds like AZ will become a "Show me your papers, now!" state. To avoid racial/ethnic profiling, they'd have to be willing to denmand proof of citizenship from everyone they propose to ticket or arrest.

So don't go out running without your papers? Or no walking around the neighborhood without your papers?

It will be interesting to see how AZ implements this part of the law.

Jun. 25 2012 11:34 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.