Arizona's Immigration Law Heads to the Supreme Court

"As long as there is not a direct conflict, which the federal government did not do a very good job of pointing to today, the Arizona law gets to stand under the Preemption Doctrine," says Reason's Damon Root, who was at the Supreme Court during Wednesday's oral arguments surrounding Arizona's controversial immigration law. "The federal government is saying that 'we have the power to stomp out all of the state experiments in immigration law enforcement.'" Much like the Health Care arguments before the Court in March, Root does not see this as a good day for the Obama administration, in part due to Solicitor General Donald Verrilli's poor performance. "At one point," Root explains "Justice Sotomayor interrupted [Verrilli] and said "look I am terribly confused by what you are saying." Runs about 3.50 minutes. Produced by Meredith Bragg. For more of Reason.tv's coverage of immigration, go here: reason.com Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

Who really benefits from any willing provider laws? The Supreme Court says it's a state's right, but is it good policy?

This digital document is an article from Behavioral Health Management, published by Medquest Communications, LLC on May 1, 2003. The length of the article is 723 words. The page length shown above is based on a typical 300-word page. The article is delivered in HTML format and is available in your Amazon.com Digital Locker immediately after purchase. You can view it with any web browser.

Citation Details
Title: Who really benefits from any willing provider laws? The Supreme Court says it's a state's right, but is it good policy? (Feature Article).
Author: Monica E. Oss
Publication: Behavioral Health Management (Magazine/Journal)
Date: May 1, 2003
Publisher: Medquest Communications, LLC
Volume: 23 Issue: 3 Page: 30(2)

Distributed by Thomson Gale