Update: Plot twist. 

The White House won’t immediately appeal this ruling. 

Josh Blackman has an interesting post explaining the possible paths going forward for the Trump administration. 

The temporary restraining order against President Trump’s executive order is still in effect, as you probably know. Josh Blackman has a good analysis of the ruling on his website, which I would recommend reading. There are a number of fascinating and disturbing elements of this decision, including the imposition of a “no evidence” standard upon the Trump administration. Although some are attempting to put the best face on what is a sweeping, unprecedented ruling, the truth is that we are entering uncharted waters. We have the largest circuit court in the federal system essentially erasing the plenary power doctrine as it relates to immigration matters.

The fact that the administration was intentionally hamstrung in its appeal is irrelevant in the larger context, i.e. we are dealing with a federal judiciary that’s unwilling to recognize Congressional and presidential authority to execute immigration law. What’s more, the reasoning, such as it is, behind this decision is so shoddy that it would be laughable if the consequences weren’t so dire. The idea that universities and colleges have a vested interest, i.e. continuing the flow of tuition dollars from the coffers of foreign students, which supersedes the national security concerns of the President and his cabinet would be an absurdity in any other era. Keep in mind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the defiant architect of the 9/11 massacres, was brought to the United States along with other Muslim students from abroad in order to pad the enrollment and keep afloat a struggling North Carolina college.

Even if the statutory and Constitutional rationales for enjoining the President’s executive order are incredibly weak-which they are-that doesn’t make the path forward any easier. Whether the administration decides to rewrite this EO from scratch, as some have suggested, or simply appeals to the Supreme Court, those of us who believe that American interests outweigh those of foreign nationals and international organizations have already been dealt a grievous blow by a judiciary which no longer recognizes itself as a co-equal branch of government.

How long before this quasi-ironic tweet becomes a reality? I suppose we’ll find out soon enough.

Today the great state of South Carolina joined a growing list of states that are on the receiving end of Justice Department lawsuits. Even as the Obama administration systematically dismantles whatever superficial immigration enforcement measures still exist, including the deportation of violent criminals, Barack Obama’s chief crony at the Department of Justice, Eric Holder, exacts revenge upon states that defy the Executive Branch’s de facto policy of wholesale amnesty. What began as a vendetta against Arizona has spread East. Governor Nikki Haley needs to be commended for standing up for the rights of South Carolinians instead of illegal alien criminals and their supporters. Regardless of whether South Carolina’s law withstands future legal appeals, the fact that individual states have not been cowed into submission by President Obama’s crusade against Americans, with Arizona the first target, is cause for hope. May the rest of this country’s governors emulate the example she and Jan Brewer have set.

The assault against Secure Communities continues apace, as we learned yesterday from the Los Angeles Times. In a lopsided vote, the Los Angeles City Council decided to make participation in this successful immigration enforcement program purely voluntary; an idea that DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano has already scotched, at least rhetorically.The problem is that despite the seemingly inflexible stance of  the Obama administration, administration officials have not seen fit to punish the states and localities that are openly flouting the guidelines of his Department of Homeland Security. If even a tenth of the energy the White House has expended in order to punish Arizona for having the temerity to enact SB 1070 were directed at cracking down on sanctuary cities, the public debate about illegal immigration would be wholly different.

As Doug McIntyre, the incomparable host of Red Eye Radio, pointed out in his opening monologue today, the craven politicians who enact bills such as the one passed by the L.A. City Council are driven by one thing: votes! They see the masses of illegal aliens and their supporters as a future, inexhaustible supply of votes in future elections, and will do anything it takes, including eroding American sovereignty, imperiling our national security, and harming American citizens, in order to tap into that rich vein of political power. Unfortunately, it seems like Los Angeles-and on a broader scale, the state of California-might be too overwhelmed by the sheer numbers  of aliens to stem this tide.

The good news is that there is still time for those of us living in states like New York, Illinois, and Massachusetts-whose governors have all recently prevented Secure Communities from being implemented-to fight back. I’ll suggest some practical ways to do so in the coming days underneath the activism column of this website.

Covered by this website at the time, this ruling would have defanged some of the most important aspects of Arizona’s landmark immigration law, including the provision that allowed for state and local law enforcement officers to ascertain the immigration status of people who had willfully violated the law. Now, instead of seeking an en banc review of the injunction, Governor Brewer is hoping to appeal directly to the Supreme Court of the United States. 

That’s why Americans who support Governor Brewer and the citizens of Arizona, which includes nearly sixty percent of the U.S. population according to most surveys, need to make their voices heard. And the most efficacious way of doing that at this moment is by supporting the men and women defending SB 1070 in court. I’ve done this before, but considering the enormous legal costs that will be incurred during the appeals process, I’m going to once again link to the website for Arizona’s legal defense, Keep Arizona Safe. 

The people of Arizona are being besieged by our own federal government, which can literally print money-a luxury not available to Governor Brewer and the Arizona State Legislature-so they need all the help they can get. I’m confident that the faithful readers of American Rattlesnake will do their part to ensure that this call does not go unheeded.

Another setback for the people of Arizona-and across the country-who want to maintain the integrity of our borders and our laws, courtesy of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has affirmed Judge Susan Bolton’s injunction against the enforcement of key provisions of SB 1070.

Its opinion is worth reading in its entirety, although I would pay particular attention to the powerful dissent by Judge Carlos T. Bea, who was himself once a legal immigrant from Cuba by way of Spain.

He eviscerates the majority’s assertion that Congress did not intend for states to have broad statutory power in implementation of federal immigration laws, even laws that specifically alluded to the power of local and state law enforcement to detain illegal aliens. He also rightly challenged the weight given to foreign countries, specifically, the government of Mexico, by the two concurring justices. Perhaps the most galling aspect of this decision isn’t the fact that it thwarts the clearly expressed will of the vast majority of Arizonans-and Americans-but that it does so on behalf of people who are not even American citizens.

While the Obama administration derides the concerns of Americans besieged by illegal aliens, drug cartels, and murderers, it openly encourages foreign governments, particularly Mexico, which is a party to this lawsuit, to help it thwart the implementation of SB 1070.

For those of you who want to see the will of Americans-and America-prevail over the parochial concerns of a corrupt, anti-American government, I suggest you consider helping out Arizona and its citizens in their time of need. You can find out how to do so at Keep Arizona Safe, a fantastic website established to defray the costly legal expenses the state of Arizona has incurred while standing up for American citizens.

•  The anti-immigrant Sweden Democrat (SD) party has thrown that country into political limbo. Doubling their electoral results from 2006, the SD has made it impossible for the ruling center-right coalition to form an outright majority without the SD’s help. The Center party is so far refusing to include them in negotiations for forming a new government.

•  Ciudad Juarez’s main newspaper, El Diario, has raised the white flag. El Diario published a front page editorial (english translation) on Sunday begging the de facto rulers of Mexico, the warring crime cartels, from killing their journalists and has asked for instructions to insure their continued safety.  It is hoped that their editorial spurs the world to recognize the terrible state of anarchy in our southern neighbor, and that it spurs us to stop the anarchy from spreading further into our own borders. The journalists and editors of El Diario have suffered greatly for their brave and honest efforts.

•  On November 1st, a federal appeals court will hear arguments on SB 1070, the Arizona law that requires local police to enforce immigration laws. Many of the controversial law’s provisions were placed on hold following an initial ruling that they intruded on federal perogatives and placed an unfair burden on legitimate citizens and immigrants.

•  Colin Powell, who urged passage of the Dream Act on Meet the Press this Sunday past, says he does not hire illegal workers. He hires contractors who then hire illegal aliens as workers.

•  The Deseret News is drawing the ire of its mostly conservative readership by advocating for amnesty and open border immigration reforms. The Deseret News, which is owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS), popularly known as the Mormons, claims that its stance is independently made and not on the orders of the mother church.

•  The Hispanic community is seen as a fertile ground for LDS evangelization.  The Deseret News’ parent company publishes a free Spanish-language newspaper, El Observador.  The thrice-weekly newspaper does not have a functioning website.  The official LDS position on immigration is an equivocal one,.  It merely recognizes the issue as important and urges civil discourse and “and the strongest desire to do what is best for all of God’s children”.

•  And while the Daily Rattle rested for two days, rattlesnakes are known to hibernate in groups for months.  A semantic study of rattlesnakes calls their communal underground hibernating lairs hibernaculums.

Over in Rhode Island, ever since Governor Donald Carcieri issued an executive order in 2008, police officers in that state have had the authority to question suspects who are pulled over for unrelated crimes about their current immigration status, as have the State Police, which has been asked to assist federal authorities, such as ICE,  in checking the immigration status of potential criminal suspects. In other words, a power very similar to what was at issue in the public debate concerning the most “controversial” aspect of SB 1070, but which Rhode Island law enforcement has no issue with, as this report illustrates.

What’s more, this authority has been given the imprimatur of juridical approval in the past year! You can read the decision in full here , which is something Judge Bolton would have been well-advised to do. For historical perspective on whether cops even need reasonable suspicion or probable cause in order to question a suspect about his or her immigration status-here’s a hint, they don’t-you can consult this Supreme Court decision.

Perhaps the most ironic aspect of this situation is that the man enforcing the new policy is the son of immigrants from Cape Verde! Of course, none of this information was proffered by the litigants seeking to overturn SB 1070, who instead relied upon a series of speculative propositions involving racial profiling that was not likely to occur-and has not occurred in Rhode Island since Governor Carcieri’s executive order has been implemented-and is specifically prohibited by the law itself. Plus, assertions about federal preemption doctrine that completely manipulated the intent and wording of Arizona’s new law.

Now, the media likes to characterize the executive order by Governor Carcieri and SB 1070 as completely different in their approaches to immigration law enforcement, and in some important respects the two statutes are very different. However, not so different as to justify the misguided, illogical legal reasoning that Judge Bolton used in her decision to enjoin the pivotal provsion of SB 1070 – an issue I shall examine more closely tomorrow.

An article in the L.A. Times today carries a slightly misleading headline implying that the legal community believes that SB 1070 is patently unconstitutional, and the debate is not even close as a matter of law. The actual piece, however, potrays a slightly different story. Nevertheless, it’s worth a look over. Will the new law pass constitutional muster?