Aren’t you glad that the Supreme Court is supposed to judge Arizona’s actions according to the law, not according to what the press puts in the headlines.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court examined Arizona’s controversial immigration law. The hearing drew both supporters and opponents of the law to the Court’s steps.
The case, Arizona v. United States, essentially comes down to whether Arizona’s law simply acts in coordination with existing laws at the national level or preempts federal authority.
Today, Sen. Charles Schumer went before the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and proposed a one-year “deferred action” legal status to immigrants whose court removal cases have been administratively closed under new immigration initiatives. A long-time proponent of immigrant reform, Senator Schumer has…
No Such Thing As Following Orders In Drug Market, Says Economist, Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University's Department of... http://t.co/xfiCDiEU No Such Thing As Following Orders In Drug Market, Says Economist, Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University's Department of... http://t.co/cwCg9ZDk Economist Says Legalizing, Jeffrey Miron, Harvard University's Department of Economics undergraduate studies direct... http://t.co/VjNr2AF8 Syrian Civil War Looms, Warns UN Human Rights Panel, An independent UN Human Rights Council report says violence co... http://t.co/JBjSwK8B
Big Pharma Is The Biggest Tax Dodger In America
Beware The “Renewable Energy Standard” Gimmick
Connect