Federal judge questions the Justice Department’s suit against the Arizona immigration law

  When the Obama regime announced that it would sue the state of Arizona over its new controversial immigration law I was one person that thought the federal government would probably win its case because federal law trumps state law.

  When a judge ordered a stay against the most controversial parts of the  law I felt justified in my position, but today a federal judge is questioning the Obama regime’s lawsuit against the beleaguered state.

  Here is what John T. Noonan Jr. had to say about the Obama regime’s lawsuit:

I’ve read your brief, I’ve read the District Court opinion, I’ve heard your interchange with my two colleagues, and I don’t understand your argument,” Noonan told deputy solicitor general Edwin S. Kneedler. “We are dependent as a court on counsel being responsive. . . . You keep saying the problem is that a state officer is told to do something. That’s not a matter of preemption. . . . I would think the proper thing to do is to concede that this is a point where you don’t have an argument

  The Obama regime is arguing that the Arizona law is unconstitutional because federal law trumps state law, but the one flaw in this argument be in the fact that the Arizona law mirrors the federal law, it does not exceed the federal law.

  This may mean that the federal lawsuit is not as cut and dried as I had originally thought that it would be. There is still a chance that the Arizona law will be upheld. This story is just beginning and we will be keeping a close eye on the results.