Arizona v. United States: Reading the Tea Leaves of Oral Argument

On April 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Arizona v. United States, involving the constitutionality of the State's effort to combat illegal immigration.  In one sense, it was a rematch between former Solicitor General Paul Clement, arguing for Arizona, and the current Solicitor General, Donald Verrilli, contending for the United States.  The two had squared off just a month before in United States v. Florida, the battle royale over the constitutionality of the ObamaCare mandate requiring everyone to purchase health care insurance prescribed by the federal government. In each case, the justices, by their questions and comments, appeared to disfavor the Obama administration's position.  In the ObamaCare case, several justices expressed concern that, if the individual mandate were to be found constitutional, it would dismantle the federal system, rendering the Tenth Amendment reservation of powers to the States and the people a dead letter. ...(Read Full Article)

COMMENTS ON AMERICANTHINKER