This is an opinion item.
| Author(s)
|
The Wall Street Journal editorial board
|
| Source
|
The Wall Street Journal
|
| Date
|
July 7, 2010
|
| URL
|
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704026204575266530340495538.html
|
| Quote
|
|
"The feds may well win their case on the Constitutional merits, and we also oppose the Arizona law on grounds that it is a misuse of scarce police resources. One of its provisions criminalizes anyone who stops to pick up an illegal migrant worker even to do yard work. Arizona police have enough to worry about without making criminals of suburbanites who want help in landscaping their cactus gardens. On the other hand, the alarmists are wrong to portray the law as creating a new race-based police state. Nearly all of the law mirrors federal immigration statutes and orders local police to enforce those statutes for the first time."
|
|
|
Add or change this opinion item's references
This item takes a mixed stance on the position Lawsuit was justified on the topic United States of America v. Arizona.
