Obama administration will sue Arizona for enforcing immigration law

Story here from CBS News. (H/T Michelle Malkin)

Excerpt:

As Hotsheet reported yesterday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a television interview in Ecuador this month that the Obama Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit” against the controversial Arizona immigration measure signed into law earlier this year.

The comment was striking because both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder had said only that the administration was considering a suit. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law, called Clinton’s comments stunning and added that “to learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the secretary of state is just outrageous.” She has said in the past she is prepared for a court fight.

It was unclear yesterday whether Clinton’s comments were simply a prediction or mistake or whether instead she was getting ahead of a planned announcement by the administration.

Now a senior administration official tells CBS News that the federal government will indeed formally challenge the law when Justice Department lawyers are finished building the case. The official said Justice is still working on building the case.

Contacted about Clinton’s comments today, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said they reflected her beliefs.

Oh he’s going to lose bad in 2010. The secular leftists are more interested in punishing law enforcement and American states than they are in punishing terrorists and rogue regimes like Iran.

Obama flip-flops on health care mandates – now it IS a tax

Here’s the deal. In order to get the health care bill to pass, Obama had to trick people into thinking that it was not going to result in higher taxes.

So, you would see him on ABC News before the bill was passed saying that forcing people to buy things they don’t want is not a tax:

OBAMA: No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?

OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.

So forcing people to buy health insurance and fining them if they don’t is NOT A TAX, he says.

And so the bill was passed.

But the thing is, the government can’t legally force people to buy health care coverage – it’s unconstitutional! And people are suing them for having passed an unconstitutional law. So now the Obama regime has to argue in court that it really is a tax in order to escape court challenges that they overstepped their bounds by passing a health care mandate.

The American Spectator explains. (H/T Hot Air)

Excerpt:

In order to protect the new national health care law from legal challenges, the Obama administration has been forced to argue that the individual mandate represents a tax — even though Obama himself argued the exact opposite while campaigning to pass the legislation.

Late last night, the Obama Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the Florida-based lawsuit against the health care law, arguing that the court lacks jurisdiction and that the State of Florida and fellow plaintiffs haven’t presented a claim for which the court can grant relief. To bolster its case, the DOJ cited the Anti-Injunction Act, which restricts courts from interfering with the government’s ability to collect taxes.

The Act, according to a DOJ memo supporting the motion to dismiss, says that “no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person, whether or not such person is the person against whom such tax was assessed.” The memo goes on to say that it makes no difference whether the disputed payment it is called a “tax” or “penalty,” because either way, it’s “assessed and collected in the same manner” by the Internal Revenue Service.

It actually is a tax, and just another one of the many ways that Obama broke his campaign promise not to tax the middle class. How else is he going to pay for the trillion-dollar deficits he is creating? He has to raise taxes – or devalue our savings with inflation. There is no third way. The money has to come from somewhere – and if you tax the rich you just end up losing jobs.

Sean McDowell is interviewed by atheist Luke Muehlhauser

Sean McDowell is interviewed by Common Sense Atheism. (H/T Conversant Life)

The MP3 file is here.

Topics:

  • Sean’s testimony (he is the son of Christian apologist Josh McDowell)
  • Sean’s debate with James Corbett on the grounding of morality
  • The role of public debates in Christian evangelism
  • Sean’s new book on the emergent church and the emerging generation
  • Can apologists on both sides really be honest about pursuing truth?
  • Are apologists on both sides good at encountering ideas on the other side?
  • Do doctrines like Heaven and Hell corrupt the honest pursuit of truth?
  • Why doesn’t Josh defend “Evidence that Demands a Verdict” from critics?
  • What should we make of weird moral rules in the Old Testament today?

Sean’s amazing debate:

This is a MUST-LISTEN. You will love this debate or your money back. And you can even watch the debate here.