The decision tomorrow will be met with emotion on both sides of the issue.  There have even been calls for civil disobedience.  How far have we come when it comes to the use of civil disobedience? It is a sad day for America when we have threats to engage in acts of civil disobedience predicated a judge deciding to uphold a state law, which enforces our current federal law. Oh yes, those are the sides in this debate: Whether a state can pass and enforce an existing federal law?     

So the people who are against the Arizona law are for the enforcement of federal law; or are they for no enforcement of immigration laws? The latter would make sense since they are not demanding the federal government file similar cases in states that have sanctuary cities.  The truth is this entire controversy has been manufactured by race hustlers, ethnocentric minority groups and labor unions.   The DOJ’s objection to the laws racial profiling is absurd since the law specifically prohibits racial profiling.  This is about the upholding the rule of law.    

Reasonable people can disagree on how to solve the illegal alien issue; President Obama and Bush both support amnesty, I disagree with them.  The American people have and continue to have the discussion and debate.  However, we cannot continue to allow: the slaughter and kidnapping of our citizens, abuse of our welfare system and the despicable, corrosive agents of human and drug trafficking, especially when we are at war with Islamic terrorists.  

The threats of civil disobedience should be met with a zero tolerance announcement of Arizona’s finest.  It is not surprising these groups engage in unlawful practices; that is exactly what they are advocating. The answer is enforcement of our laws and elected official upholding their oath to protect and defend the constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic…and the invasion continues…