We are pleased Judge Susan Bolton had the wisdom to strike down key provisions of SB1070. Her restraining order says Arizona can't require immigrants to carry immigration papers or require police to question immigrants about their status, By saying federal law has precedence over state law Judge Bolton has, in effect, ruled that SB1070 is unconstitutional. The text of her ruling is available here.

The new Arizona law was set to go into effect Thursday, July 29. There have been scattered reports of undocumented aliens streaming into New Mexico to add to our estimated population of 60,000 aliens as a direct result of this law.

Right wing advocates, including sponsor Russell Pearce, a Republican, feel that Arizona has not only the right, but the obligation to protect its borders in the wake of increasing border crime and a burgeoning illegal immigrant population costing cash-strapped local governments to pay more to educate their children and for health care.

Progressives, including President Obama, not only believe the law is unconstitutional (it is), but that it is divisive, misguided, unenforceable, and counter to American values. The Immigration Policy Center  summarizes specific, relevant problems with SB1070.

And, according to local law enforcement, it would put police in a "damned if you do, and damned if you don't" position regarding the law. Even worse, the law would keep many illegals from reporting crime for fear of deportation.

Against this backdrop it is somewhat strange that Arizona would pursue a course that was bound to run afoul of the constitution.

But this was not about right and wrong. It was clearly wrong even without the profiling argument, expressed by the far left and many Hispanics. The real issue was electioneering and getting votes for conservatives candidates.

This brings us to Dan Stein, President of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). During an interview on CNN, Stein seemed to have some good ideas. In fact, I found myself actually agreeing with his slick-sounding narrative (just visit his website.  

Stein supported giving guest worker visas to illegals in the U.S. with jobs, speak English, and who agree to go to the "back of the line" to get a permanent resident visa. But he is against giving visas to anyone who as ever committed a crime.

The next guest on CNN mentioned that it is virtually impossible to live in the USA as an illegal immigrant without committing a crime such as document fraud, or other less serious offenses.

When questioned about this, Stein replied that he could see keeping some illegals, but:

"It would only take about 12 years to deport the other 12 million illegals."

Uh…, really Dan??

So, if the head of one of the most influential right wing groups is beating the long-dead horse of "just deport ‘em [all]" then what does this say about the collective intelligence of the right? Why compromise or even listen to them?

Here's why: this misguided Arizona law is or was a legal cry for help to the federal government. Congress needs to pass comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Maybe not this year-there are higher priorities--but in 2011. The bill should include provisions for tighter borders, a guest worker program, and a path to citizenship. This is the right way. Arizona is the wrong way.

The Party of No and their little siblings, the Tea Party, need to get real or get out of the way.

And let's watch Dan Stein follow up on his recent comments--a position that should make him the laughing stock of those interested in serious immigration debate.