It is hard to do what is called for when you do not feel it is what is right. There are times that things are clear cut, but do not seem to be what is the right thing. Such, for some, is the case on illegal immigration.
For many, the issue is solely seen from the human side of things. There are families and people involved. Others see things from the legal side. These people are here illegally. They have not paid their way in and are leeching off the system.
So, now we see that the issue has been sent to SCOTUS to decide.
The Washington Times reports
A deeply divided Supreme Court grappled Monday with President Obama’s deportation amnesty, as conservatives said the White House was encroaching on Congress‘ lawmaking powers, but liberal justices saying the court should stay out of the fight, leaving the president with a free hand.
One has to wonder which way they will look at this situation. Will they look at it from the human side of things or the legal? This will show us something about the way SCOTUS views itself.
Setting immigration aside for a moment, let us see what it will say about the court. If they side with the first group, the human side lets call it; then they are saying that Obama’s decision should be law. If they take the second, they are saying it is not the law.
So, one is a statement of what should be, and the other is a statement of what is. Which best suits their job description?
I am not pro-amnesty. I do not believe that we should encourage lawlessness, but are our immigration laws just? Many of us wish to point to our Founding Fathers and rightly so, but what restrictions did they place on immigration?
If SCOTUS does their job, they will strike down Obama’s fiat law. He had no Constitutional power to act in such a way. But if Congress would do theirs, there would be a legal solution to this problem.