29 July 2010

An Abominable Decision - Mark R. Levin - The Corner on National Review Online

An Abominable Decision - Mark R. Levin - The Corner on National Review Online

This is a typical example of a judge stating the correct legal standard, but then ignoring it and applying the test in a fashion completely divorced from the facts of the case in order to reach a predetermined decision.

First, the court states correctly that the sort of constitutional challenge brought here — a facial challenge — is the most difficult challenge to mount successfully. It requires that the plaintiff (here the federal government) must demonstrate that the law can never be applied in a constitutional fashion. The test cannot be met with hypothetical arguments — yet that is exactly what the court relies on in its ruling: the assertion that the AZ law will impose an impermissible burden on law enforcement, which is to determine the legal status of a person detained pursuant to the AZ law on the reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally. The court does not provide any empirical basis to support its conclusion. It’s pure supposition.
Read the rest The Great One on NRO.

Suki Series BackgroundSuki Series TechOrder the paperback edition of Suki V: The CollectionBrowse the series on Google: Suki I, Suki II, Suki III, Suki IV, Suki VFan Fiction: John and Suki: Vacation Fun

John and Suki's news and comment area, from a Libertarian perspective.
Copyright 2009, 2010, SJE Enterprises, all rights reserved.

No comments:

Post a Comment