Why obey a lawless court?

I know I'm showing my age here, but aren't judges supposed to make sure the laws get enforced?

The Obama administration declines to enforce the immigration laws currently on the books — despite Mr. Obama having sworn an oath to do so — which would call for rounding up and deporting illegal aliens wherever they're found.

"But you can't round up 12 million people!" the fans of amnesty squawk. Which is like telling your dad you can't plow the whole field.

"Son," he'd say, "it's a nice day for it. So you just start here; plow the first furrow, and see how it goes. If you can only get it half done, come on down the house later and we'll feed you half your lunch."

"But how are we to spot them without checking the ID of everyone who looks Hispanic, which would be evil 'profiling'?" the fans of amnesty whine.

Oh, I don't know. You wouldn't have wanted to send ICE agents to check the IDs of all those Mexican ladies celebrating outside the courthouse in Phoenix when Clinton appointee Judge Susan Bolton stayed enforcement of huge chunks of the new Arizona law Wednesday, I don't suppose.

What percentage do you think would be "hits" if they just sent someone down to the post office to chat with everyone sending an "envio" to Mexico ... instead of the U.S. GOVERNMENT POSTAL SERVICE actually advertising to attract this business ... in Spanish?

The judge held the new Arizona law, which incorporates pieces of the actual federal law, is improper because only federal agents can enforce federal law.

The ramifications of that precedent are darned interesting, and I'd like to see the federals live with them. No more taking along a local cop with them on drug or gun raids to try and resolve those pesky jurisdictional issues. No more counting on local cops to help them at the airports, or anywhere else.

But what the judge really means, of course, is that Arizona cops busting illegals and then calling federal immigration cops to come haul them away would seriously embarrass the federals, because it would become obvious to everyone that they'd just be driving the scofflaws around the corner and letting them go. Presuming they showed up, at all.

What's at the heart of Arizonans' objections? Racism? I don't think so. I lived in Arizona for years and saw plenty of white folks and Hispanic folks working side-by-side. I also know plenty of proud American citizens of Hispanic descent who'd like to see the laws enforced — with or without enactment of a new, enforceable "bracero" program.

I think the real problem is that struggling Arizona taxpayers are being forced to pay for the schooling, the free emergency room health care, and lots of other benefits now enjoyed by these millions of illegals, well ... illegally.

And what law requires them to do that? No law. The courts have simply ordered taxpayers to meet an endlessly growing demand for free stuff, because it seemed like a nice thing to do. Though I've never seen any judge say, "and you can start by using my salary."

So when there IS a law, the courts rule the people have no legal avenue to get the law enforced, and when there ISN'T any law, the courts just make it up because it feels good.

Why? Why couldn't the federal judge have shown some initiative and just issued a writ of mandamus, instructing the Obama administration to start rounding up and deporting illegals, to start enforcing the law, to give overburdened Arizona taxpayers some relief? And "If you don't like the law, you control both damned houses of Congress," she could have said, "Gather up your votes and either change the law, or repeal it. You want open borders? Repeal all the immigration laws, lay off all the border guards, stop pretending, and take your chances at the polls."

If the courts are no longer an independent branch of government, which can be trusted to haul the executive branch out behind the woodshed and give it a hiding when it refuses to do its job ... how long do they expect us to keep following their orders?

I'm not saying the courts have to always please the majority. Sometimes the mob does have to be reminded the Constitution protects the liberties of the minority, even to do things the majority finds appalling. Any constitutional authorization for the War on Drugs, or to regulate drugs and medicines at all, or to stop 14-year-old girls from buying machine guns over the counter for cash? Nope, sorry. Since there are no such delegated powers, all such liberties are protected by the 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments.

And yes, even illegal aliens have human and civil rights — no one should be allowed to just round them up and shoot them. They should be treated humanely ...

... all the way back to the border.