Star One Smart Blog's

Did Federal Judge Susan Bolton have legal standing to rule in the Arizona "Undocumented Democrats Immigrants: Just Enforce the Damned Existing Federal Laws, Obama!" case?

Possibly not...

In a stunning development that could potentially send the nation into a Constitutional crisis, an astute attorney who is well-versed in Constitutional law states that the ruling against the state of Arizona by Judge Susan Bolton concerning its new immigration law is illegal.

The attorney in question submitted her assertion in a special article in the Canada Free Press. Her argument states in part,

"Does anyone read the U.S. Constitution these days? American lawyers don’t read it. Federal Judge Susan R. Bolton apparently has never read it. Same goes for our illustrious Attorney General Eric Holder. But this lawyer has read it and she is going to show you something in Our Constitution which is as plain as the nose on your face.

"Article III, Sec. 2, clause 2 says:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction."

In other words, the Judge in the Arizona case has absolutely no Constitutional jurisdiction over the matter upon which she ruled. As the Constitution makes abundantly clear, only the U.S. Supreme Court can issue rulings that involve a state.

This means that neither Judge Bolton nor the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, to which the case is being appealed, have any legal standing whatsoever to rule on the issue.

Thus, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder filed the federal government's lawsuit against the state of Arizona in a court that has no authority to hear the case.

But the Constitution is simply an anachronistic block to Progressives and far-left Social Democrats who would redefine the damned outdated thing to make America more 'fair' and less 'egalitarian'. We must overcome and remake the clauses of the Constitution we don't like, Obama and similar like-minded soft socialists say, to move us forward to a new order, where people are all well-kept and tended by Statists Who Care.

Who needs pesky borders, anyway? Just open 'em up and redistribute land and wealth at will. You uncaring Americans, you!

---

Well, not exactly true. He did give lessons in how not to approach and bend over for various world leaders. Obsequiousness in (a) black dress.

Dr. Nile Gardinier, Director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation:

No American president has spent more time abroad in his first year in office than Barack Obama. His trip to Asia this week is his 8th foreign tour, taking the total number of countries visited to 20.

But what does the president have to show for all his gallivanting across the world stage and countless apologies for America’s past? Almost nothing, except for adoring crowds in exotic locales, and bemused monarchs surprised by groveling bows from the most powerful leader on the face of the earth.

It is a monumental task trying to come up with any concrete foreign policy successes from the Obama administration. On the Iranian nuclear crisis, arguably the biggest threat to international security of the Obama presidency, the administration’s high-risk strategy of engagement with the mullahs of Tehran has only emboldened America’s enemies and renewed their determination to press ahead with their nuclear weapons program.

On Afghanistan, the White House’s spectacular dithering on whether to send more troops is seriously damaging America’s standing as a world power, and undercutting the fight against the Taliban. As for the global War on Terror, it no longer even exists in the eyes of the White House. It has been replaced by the “Overseas Contingency Operation,” the sort of name typically given to a glorified U.N. peacekeeping operation.

As for America’s traditional alliances, especially the transatlantic alliance, they have taken a serious beating under the Obama administration. It is hard to think of a president who has shown less interest in the security of Europe than Barack Obama, as was shown by his government’s recent callous disregard for key allies in eastern and central Europe.

The humiliating surrender to Moscow’s demands over scrapping Third Site missile defense, and the decision to throw Poland and the Czech Republic under the bus in the face of Russian intimidation, will dramatically erode faith in the United States across the Atlantic for a generation. In a further snub to Europe, the president couldn’t even be bothered to attend the ceremonies marking the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall --one of the greatest events in the history of the past century.

Let's have some liberal answer the question: Exactly what has Baracky done to enhance the stature and standing of the United States (remember, he swore an oath to uphold OUR Constitution, not an oath to promote a one-world underanybodybutGod World Goverment) ?

I can't see him having done much more than his ordinary teleprompter-bluster and crowd-wowing. That doesn't translate to Good Things for the citizens of the United States of America (you know, the people he actually works for).

A stylish showman with no substance, our Baracky.

h/t Dan Collins @vermontaigne

---