The Constitution Trumps Arizona

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 11:43, July 13, 2010 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with '{{Item |author=The New York Times editorial board |source=The New York Times |date=July 7, 2010 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/opinion/08thu1.html |quote="The Supreme Cou...')
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) The New York Times editorial board
Source The New York Times
Date July 7, 2010
URL http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/opinion/08thu1.html
Quote
Quotes-start.png "The Supreme Court has said federal authority can pre-empt state law when the federal interest is dominant and where there already exists a system of federal regulations. The government has done a poor job enforcing its immigration rules, to say the least, but they do exist, and clearly fall under what the Constitution calls “the supreme law of the land.”" Quotes-end.png


Add or change this opinion item's references


This item argues for the position Lawsuit was justified on the topic United States of America v. Arizona.