Supreme Court to Hear Arizona Immigration Law: Mark Sherman of the Associated Press reports the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to rule on Arizona's controversial immigration crackdown law. The justices will review a federal appeals court ruling that blocked several provisions of the Arizona law. The Obama Administration challenged the Arizona law, arguing that regulating immigration is the job of the federal government, not states. The state of Arizona says the federal government isn't doing enough to address illegal immigration and border states are suffering. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer said, "This case is not just about Arizona. It's about every state grappling with the costs of illegal immigration." The arguments will most likely take place in late April.
Calling the Question on the Death Penalty in Oregon: The Oregonian editorial board has this piece about Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber's invitation for a debate and then reform regarding the state's death penalty. But what if voters are fine with the law the way it is? In 2002 an effort to put a measure on the state's ballot that would replace the death penalty with life imprisonment was abandoned after a poll suggested it had little chance of success. The editorial board says those who have praised Kitzhaber's actions should consider the implications of an elected official declaring he finds something in the constitution "immoral" and that he simply can't abide it. What if the issue was abortion or gay marriage? Then what would they think about a chief executive overriding a law voters put into the state constitution? The board says that even if Oregonians do decide to abandon the death penalty, it is their law and they are the ones who must make that decision.
Calling the Question on the Death Penalty in Oregon: The Oregonian editorial board has this piece about Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber's invitation for a debate and then reform regarding the state's death penalty. But what if voters are fine with the law the way it is? In 2002 an effort to put a measure on the state's ballot that would replace the death penalty with life imprisonment was abandoned after a poll suggested it had little chance of success. The editorial board says those who have praised Kitzhaber's actions should consider the implications of an elected official declaring he finds something in the constitution "immoral" and that he simply can't abide it. What if the issue was abortion or gay marriage? Then what would they think about a chief executive overriding a law voters put into the state constitution? The board says that even if Oregonians do decide to abandon the death penalty, it is their law and they are the ones who must make that decision.
How about the tripartite balance of power Governor Kitzhaber? Have you respect for the will of the people and their right to representative government? Even the opinionated and heavy-handed President F.D.R. in 1933 said this:
"That was asked me for four years while I was Governor of the State of New York… My own personal belief is that I would like to see capital punishment abolished throughout this country, but, on the other hand, every law enforcement officer with whom I have ever spoken…believes that capital punishment is a definite and distinct deterrent of murder.
It is, primarily, a *legislative matter*. I am in the unfortunate position here, as I was in Albany, of *having to pass* on the question of the death penalty." http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=14550#ixzz1frcdzber
-Adamakis