PDA

View Full Version : Tying AZ Immigration argument to 2nd Amendment


SDProtection
04-11-2011, 7:39 PM
I am sure somewhere my question has been asked and probably answered as well, but I can’t seem to find it. So, I hope some of the qualified legal minds on this board might shed some light for me.

The ninth circuit announced today that it is upholding the injunction on the AZ Immigration ruling because it is up to the Feds to enforce Immigration Law as constitutionally mandated. Well, why then can’t the same argument be made that ALL gun laws have to be enforced (and made by) the Feds. Thus all of the crazy Kalifornia laws would be moot…..wouldn’t they under that argument?

here is the link todays ruling:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/arizona-immigration-law-enforcement-blocked-circuit-court/story?id=13350124

PsychGuy274
04-11-2011, 7:42 PM
My guess is that the states have the right to impose 2A restrictions through the 10A.

Hogstir
04-11-2011, 8:09 PM
A follow thru question might be why can't the states sue the Feds for not enforcing what they are constitutionally mandated to enforce?

safewaysecurity
04-11-2011, 8:20 PM
The regulation of guns is not explicitly stated in the federal constitution while immigration and border control and relations between countries is explicitly a federal power. All powers not explicitly granted to the federal government is given to the states and the people.

Philthy
04-11-2011, 8:42 PM
A follow thru question might be why can't the states sue the Feds for not enforcing what they are constitutionally mandated to enforce?

Sovereign immunity?

SDProtection
04-12-2011, 6:24 PM
Good point about the delegation of powers. Makes sense. Thanks.