Source: http://www.mtv.com/overdrive/?artist=1270&vid=770351
dallas mavericks washington capitals elizabeth warren delmon young amare stoudemire tallest building in the world the pitch
Our Company Inc.
2458 S . 124 St.Suite 47
Town City 21447
Phone: 124-457-1178
Fax: 565-478-1445
Source: http://321blog.info/Animals/horses/pole-barns-for-horses/
christine will ferrell double fine adventure turbo tax katharine mcphee cold mountain valentines day ideas
Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.
Source: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/newsnation/47999911/
bcs jay z glory alabama crimson tide barry larkin jay z new song torrie wilson alabama lsu
Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.
grok cirque du freak eric cantor eric cantor pope joan pope joan paul pierce
President Barack Obama walks back to the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais/pool)
President Barack Obama walks back to the Blue Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais/pool)
President Barack Obama speaks in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP Photo/Luke Sharrett/Pool)
President Barack Obama speaks in the East Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012, after the Supreme Court ruled on his health care legislation. (AP Photo/Luke Sharrett pool)
This artist rendering shows Chief Justice John Roberts, center, speaking at the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, June 28, 2012. From left are, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Elena Kagan. (AP Photo/Dana Verkouteren)
FILE - This Oct. 8, 2010 file photo shows the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court at the Supreme Court in Washington. Seated from left are Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, and Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justices Anthony M. Kennedy and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Standing, from left are Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Samuel Alito Jr., and Elena Kagan. The Supreme Court on Thursday, June 28, 2012, upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Barack Obama's historic health care overhaul. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) ? The Supreme Court settled the legal argument over health care Thursday. Now people in the United States will find out if President Barack Obama's overhaul can work as advertised to provide coverage to millions of uninsured while also keeping costs in check.
If it works, the U.S. will move closer to other economically advanced countries that for years have guaranteed health insurance to their citizens. If the plan falters, expect endless political wrangling over the nation's problems with high medical costs, widespread waste and millions of uninsured people.
"My hope is we will have access to health care for our whole family that we can actually afford," Vicki McCuistion, one of 6.7 million uninsured Texans, said after learning of the Supreme Court decision.
At the White House, Obama renewed that promise, though the answer may not be fully known for years.
Republicans from presidential candidate Mitt Romney to lawmakers on Capitol Hill will keep pushing to repeal what they deride as "Obamacare," but the focus now quickly shifts from Washington to the states.
While health insurers, big hospitals and major employers have spent the last two years carrying out early provisions of the law and planning for many that are yet to come, states are all over the lot.
Although they are expected to play a crucial role in carrying out the law, only 14 states, plus the District of Columbia, have adopted a plan for doing so.
Hoping the Affordable Care Act will be overturned, Republican governors and legislatures have resisted setting up new insurance markets that are a linchpin of the legislation, and that could turn into a problem for the whole country.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners expects only about half the states to be ready to set up new health insurance markets, set to open for business in 2014. If states aren't ready, the law calls for Washington to step in and run things.
State plans for the markets, called exchanges, are due to the federal government by this fall. In states that fail to go ahead, Washington will run the exchange, which is supposed to provide one-stop shopping for health insurance, steering middle-class households to private plans and low-income people to Medicaid.
"States are going to have to make a pretty quick decision on exchanges," said North Dakota's insurance commissioner, Adam Hamm, a Republican. Most state legislatures have gone out of session, though governors may call lawmakers back.
The court ruling threw a new wrinkle into the decision that may give some states an incentive to hold back on expanding Medicaid coverage.
More than 8 in 10 people in the country have health insurance, so the vast majority are in compliance with the coverage requirement now validated by the court. The justices said new penalties for those who ignore the insurance mandate are authorized under the taxing powers of Congress.
For most of the uninsured, the ruling offers the promise of guaranteed coverage at affordable prices. Lower-income and many middle-class families will be eligible for subsidies to help pay premiums starting in 2014.
There's also an added safety net for everyone, insured and uninsured.
Beginning in 2014, insurance companies will not be able to deny coverage for medical reasons; they also cannot charge more for people with health problems. Those protections, now standard in most big employer plans, will be available to all, including people who get laid off or leave a corporate job to launch their own small business.
Older people benefit from the law through better Medicare coverage for those with high prescription costs, and no copayments for preventive care. But hospitals, nursing homes, and many other service providers may struggle once the Medicare cuts used to finance the law really start to bite.
Illegal immigrants are not entitled to the new insurance coverage under the law, and will remain one of the biggest groups uninsured.
Obama's law is by no means the last word on health care.
Experts expect costs to keep rising, meaning that lawmakers will have to revisit the thorny issue perhaps as early as next year, when federal budget woes will force them to confront painful options for Medicare and Medicaid, the federal programs that cover seniors, the disabled, and low-income people.
Even some supporters of the law acknowledge that it's only a first installment: get most people covered, and then deal with the problem of costs.
The health insurance's industry top lobbyist said the ruling relieved one big concern for insurers ? that the mandate would be struck down. But the companies are still worried about costs.
"Without universal participation you have no incentive to purchase coverage until you are sick, and that is not an insurance system," said Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans. "Now it's time to turn all the attention toward affordability." The industry continues to fight taxes and other requirements in the law.
In contrast to the states, the vast health care industry is better prepared. When the law passed in 2010, insurers, hospitals and major employers immediately started planning to carry it out. Many of the changes called for in the law were already being demanded by employers trying to get better value for their private health insurance dollars.
"The main driver here is financial," said Dr. Toby Cosgrove, CEO of the Cleveland Clinic, which has pioneered some of the changes. "The factors driving health care reform are not new, and they are not going to go away."
___
Online:
Health care interactive: http://hosted.ap.org/interactives/2012/healthcare
Associated Pressalec baldwin alec baldwin college basketball oakland pinnacle airlines kansas vs kentucky joe posnanski
The private space telescope forms the heart of Project Sentinel, a deep-space mission being unveiled today in Mountain View, Calif., by a nonprofit group of scientists and explorers that advocates better space rock monitoring.
This image depicts the region of view of the B612 Foundation's planned Sentinel Space Telescope to monitor potentially dangerous asteroids.
B612 Foundation
EnlargeThe hunt is on. A group of scientists has banded together to build the world?s first privately funded deep-space telescope, to hunt for asteroids that could pose a major threat to Earth.
Skip to next paragraph' +
google_ads[0].line2 + '
' +
google_ads[0].line3 + '
The?private space telescope?forms the heart of Project Sentinel, a deep-space mission being unveiled today (June 28) in Mountain View, Calif., by the B612 Foundation, a nonprofit group of scientists and explorers that has long advocated the exploration of asteroids and better space rock monitoring.
Project Sentinel involves the development of a super-snooper telescope that would be placed in orbit around the sun. The goal, foundation officials say, is to create the first comprehensive dynamic map of our inner solar system.
That map would yield a lively look at the present and future locations and trajectories of?near-Earth asteroids, paving the way to protecting the Earth from future impacts and opening the solar system to future exploration. [Sentinel Space Telescope's Asteroid Mission (Pictures)]??
An asteroid sentinel in space
Ed Lu is B612 chairman and CEO, a former NASA astronaut who has flown on the space shuttle and Russia's Soyuz capsule and lived aboard the International Space Station.
"The reason we?re doing this is because we can!"Lu told SPACE.com
Private organizations can now carry out awe-inspiring and audacious projects that previously only governments could accomplish, Lu said.
"So it isn?t crazy to think of a large telescope being funded privately. In fact, historically, that has been the way large, private?telescopes here on Earth?have been funded. The exception here is that rather than being on the Earth, this one is orbiting the sun," Lu said.
A lot of work has gone into shaping Project Sentinel over the last year, Lu said. Akin to the architectural plans for a building, he said, a preliminary spacecraft and mission design is complete.
"This isn?t a viewgraph," Lu added."What we?ve built is the best technical team on this planet."
A firm fixed-price proposal to carry out Project Sentinel has been submitted by Ball Aerospace of Boulder, Colo., enabled in part by early infrared-detector work funded by B612.
No stranger to big space scopes, Ball Aerospace is the technical sparkplug behind such NASA-sponsored spacecraft as theplanet-hunting Kepler mission?and the infrared Spitzer Space Telescope.
Under a NASA Space Act Agreement signed with B612, the space agency will provide Deep Space Network communications and tracking as well as technical support.
Hunting asteroids for all mankind
Project Sentinel would complete its near-Earth object (NEO) survey work in 5.5 years.
"The line in the sand is for the spacecraft to find 90 percent of near-Earth objects larger than 140 meters [459 feet] in size. That translates into approximately a 100-megaton explosion should one hit the Earth," Lu said. "If we go as long as we think we?re going to go, we?re also going to find the vast majority of Tunguskas, too." [7 Strangest Asteroids in the Solar System]
The Tunguska River in remote Siberia was the site directly under a huge explosion in 1908, an air burst of a large meteoroid or comet fragment estimated to have flattened more than 80 million trees over 830 square miles (2,150 square kilometers).
According to B612, only about 10,000 of the more than half million asteroids ?larger than the?1908 Tunguska asteroidwhose orbits cross Earth?s orbit have been discovered and tracked.
Project Sentinel would find and road-map Earth-bound asteroids with sufficient warning time ? years to decades ? to enable deflection missions.
This all adds up to an awe-inspiring project for the global good, the B612 NEO team said.
Space telescope price tag
What?s the cost to build the Project Sentinel telescope?
"We can?t disclose the final price, but I can give you a ballpark of a few hundred million dollars. Which is, I think, a factor of several less than what NASA could do this for," Lu said.
To foot the bill for Project Sentinel, a worldwide fundraising campaign is being implemented, including outreach to citizens around the globe.
"Our constituency is everybody," said B612 spokeswoman Diane Murphy.
"If you think about it, what we are is a small capital campaign," Lu said. "At any given time in the United States, there?s probably a hundred fundraising campaigns larger than this ? for symphony halls, museums, performing arts centers."
Data pipeline set
As now forecast, Project Sentinel would be launched in 2016 aboard a?SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, Lu said. The spacecraft operations center is to be based at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics (LASP) at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
Project Sentinel would require a gravity slingshot off Venus to enter solar orbit. Data relay would be carried out through the NASA Deep Space Network. Data analysis ? identification of NEO threats ? is to be handled through an existing data pipeline at the Minor Planet Center in Cambridge, Mass., and the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.
"When you stand back from this, ? this is like the whole issue of mapping the U.S, and almost everything else that precedes real development and exploration," said former astronaut Rusty Schweickart, B612 chairman emeritus, who was the lunar module pilot on the Apollo 9 mission.
"The meta-view of what we?re doing ? is mapping the Earth, sun, the inner solar system ? the Earth Territory, if you will," Schweickart said. That, he said, would pave the way toward protecting the Earth from impacts and opening the solar system to exploration. ??
Legacy space systems
"An exciting aspect of Ball?s role on Sentinel is leveraging sophisticated technology developed under the Deep Impact, Spitzer, and Kepler missions for the B612 Foundation," said John Troeltzsch, the company?s Sentinel Program manager.
Troeltzsch told SPACE.com the aerospace firm will reuse deep-space elements the company helped pioneer. For the privately funded mission, that could include the science-downlink technology flown on Kepler and the cryogenic thermal-isolation system from the?Spitzer Space Telescope.
The Sentinel ground system will build on the system in daily use by the Kepler mission, which is supplied to Ball by the LASP at Colorado-Boulder.
"Ball has been working on the mission concept for a?NEO survey mission?like Sentinel since 2005. This has allowed us to refine and iterate the design to a state of maturity that supports a commercial offering to B612," Troeltzsch said. "Although there are challenges in front of us, like the development of the focal plane detectors, the overall system is based on proven, high-heritage systems."
Troeltzsch said it?s not every day you can have fun working on a powerful space telescope and help protect the planet at the same time.
?Sooner or later one of the NEOs that Sentinel will discover will end up on a?collision course with the Earth. I am sure that my kids and grandkids will appreciate the foresight B612 has shown in sponsoring this mission to help protect us all,? Troeltzsch concluded.
Leonard David has been reporting on the space industry for more than five decades. He is a winner of last year's National Space Club Press Award and former editor-in-chief of the National Space Society's Ad Astra and Space World magazines. He has written for SPACE.com since 1999.
ufc on fox 2 supercross christina aguilera etta james funeral sundance film festival victoria azarenka the flintstones etta james
?
In today's hard economy, they must figure out how to invest every dollar that they have where it will grow the most while you are managing your organization. Step in the act is always to come with a stunning & effective design package. They ought to choose a cheap web designer who can put our website to a greater rank in the search results to be sure that our customer or clients can see us immediately. While for everyone those individuals who haven?t hear whatever thing regarding yourself beside mutually with your trade, and to contain their attentions valour not to be so simple. Plenty of reasons exist why people need their own website. Irrespective of its purpose, it ought to somehow entertain people, educate them & provide them vital information.
If you are in to different business of selling different services or services or products, using an online site that will sell your services or services or products is a nice income opportunity. You might ask your designer to generate a custom e commerce site so that your whole services or services or products are going to be consideration to people inside a professional way. When they have an online site that is professionally done by a specialist design firm, more clients will trust us & work with us. The main advantage of hiring a graphic website design group is you are definite to have a beautiful personalized website which could attract potential buyers to accomplish the critical purchasing hard work right there then. Whether there is a massive or little firm, a cheap and best web design company definitely exists for you. Web designer job or as a profession, earn respect in today's economy his or her presence is vital in every entrepreneur's business.
Website designers are generating a lot in the event that they may be known to provide quality service. Although some folks don't view it like a profession but a part time job, the advantages it gives to someone is substantial that it could be also the origin of income for the whole relatives. Web designing is not a simple task. It requires analysis, proper planning and conceptualization in addition to creative arts. It encompasses every field of study because communication places an important role in their job.
The revenue that designers receive depends on lots of feature including the difficulty of the required web-site, when the packages integrate search engine optimization or service of website hosting and often the timeframe that you need. The faster you need the site; the priciest it gets because they need to render overtime in order to get things done. The amount you will be spending in your website is incomparable towards the quantity of customers that you are walking in the long run.
The most popular reason why people look in to hiring an affordable design firm is the financial issue that lots of companies experience with the world competition. Much more people often venture walking a business because they able to administer their own a number of times and income different being employed in the sure firm. Most entrepreneurs have an inclination to hire a reasonable website design service because they recognize that every web designers now days are completely build with experiences and knowledge in web design and best SEO Company.
There are plenty of website designers today & most of which hand out a brilliant service. You might follow a quantity of these tips prior to deciding to hire:
A tiny web designing, SEO firm and professional web development that are consists of at least ten specialists will be more dedicated to doing the work. This is true that they desire their business proven to everybody. They require establishing rapport with their clients so that lots more people in the long run will trust them & hire them to perform a definite task.
Ask your online design group to show you their website & a portfolio from the work to enable you to see & judge all by yourself how lovely they are.
An affordable website design company that offers quality or excellent service may be you need to look for. You ought to understand if they are the proper firm when they surpass your whole standards.
?
?
?
?
 | Harryponting adeel ahmed |
usc oregon big game jeremy london jeremy london butterball turkey fryer butterball turkey fryer yale harvard
MINNEAPOLIS ? Twins Minor League pitcher Paul Bargas passed away Tuesday night after battling a rare form of brain cancer. He was 23.
Bargas, who was acquired by the Twins in a trade with the Rockies before the 2011 season, began experiencing headaches that offseason, but reported to Fort Myers, Fla., for Spring Training in March. But he complained of severe headaches and disorientation upon his arrival and was eventually diagnosed with primary central nervous system lymphoma.
He battled the disease for more than a year, as he went through chemotherapy at UCLA Medical Center in California.
?He?s battled this thing off and on,? assistant general manager Rob Antony said. ?He?s had some setbacks. I got a message from our scout John Leavitt on Monday that he had taken a turn for the worse. And I got the news [Tuesday] night he had passed away.
?But when we were in Anaheim on the last trip [in early May], John Leavitt, who did a great job keeping in touch with Paul and his family, and I went to UCLA Medical Center to see Paul. He hadn?t eaten in a few days, but when we saw him, he was in really good spirits. We were there for two hours. Every time we got up, he kept saying, ?I?m all right, I?m all right.??
Antony added that even though Bargas never threw a pitch for the Twins? organization, he was still a part of the Twins family.
?The thing he talked about the most was, ?I can?t believe you guys traded for me and I never played a game for you guys, but you treat me like family,?? Antony said. ?And I said, ?You are the minute we draft you or trade for you.? He was an unbelievable person. I?m serious. There was a never a ?Why me?? in him.?
A native of Perris, Calif., Bargas is survived by his wife, Victoria. The Twins will announce funeral arrangements once they become available.
MINNEAPOLIS ? The selections for the 2012 All-Star Game will be announced on Sunday, but it didn?t stop Twins manager Ron Gardenhire from giving his opinion on Wednesday about which Twins he thinks are deserving of the honor.
Joe Mauer, who was second in the voting among American League catchers in the last ballot update on Monday, remains an obvious candidate, alongside outfielder Josh Willingham.
But Gardenhire said there are a few other Twins who at least deserve consideration to represent the Twins on July 10 at Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City.
?Willingham has done really well,? Gardenhire said. ?We?ve had some guys in the bullpen who have had a really nice first half. I know a guy like Ben Revere might not get noticed or Denard Span. I think Span, man, might?ve been our best player in the first half this year. He?s been consistently getting it done. I?d sure like to see him get a look. Benny is having a heck of a first half. And Joe Mauer is hitting three-whatever and getting it done, and you don?t see many catchers doing that.?
Among bullpen arms, Gardenhire pointed to left-hander Glen Perkins and right-hander Jared Burton. Burton has a 2.90 ERA with 29 strikeouts in 31 innings, while Perkins has a 2.84 ERA with 41 strikeouts in 31 2/3 innings.
?There are some people out there who have played really well,? Gardenhire said. ?Josh Willingham has had a heck of a first half and probably gets the most notice on our baseball team. So we?ve had some good performances. And I?m probably forgetting a couple. Perkins and Burton have thrown really, really well.?
MINNEAPOLIS ? Reliever Tyler Robertson made history Tuesday night when he became the first Twins pitcher to record three strikeouts in one inning in a Major League debut.
Robertson struck out all three batters he faced in the eighth inning of Minnesota?s 3-2 loss to the White Sox. He got Alejandro De Aza swinging, Kevin Youkilis looking and Adam Dunn swinging.
?That was fun to see,? manager Ron Gardenhire said. ?You never know what you?re going to get that first outing. We asked him after the fact if he was nervous, and he said, ?Absolutely.? But he maintained his composure. Three strikeouts ? you can?t do much better than that as a pitcher.?
Robertson admitted he did have butterflies out there, but said he was able to settle in despite the nerves.
?I was nervous, but it was a good kind of nervous,? Robertson said. ?I was confident. I?ve been waiting for this moment for a long time, and I felt like I was ready. But I mean, you can?t prepare for pitching in front of that many people if you?ve never done it before, and it got loud, and I loved it.?
MINNEAPOLIS ? Twins outfielder Ben Revere has been one of the hottest hitters in baseball this month ? he was tied for the Major League lead in hits with 35 entering Wednesday ? but has also been getting it done on the basepaths.
He was tied for the lead in hits with Angels rookie Mike Trout, and is second only to Trout in stolen bases with 11 in 13 tries in June.
Revere, who led the team with 34 stolen bases as a rookie last season, has 15 on the year to rank tied for fourth in the American League despite playing in just 41 games entering Wednesday.
?He?s pretty good at anticipating,? Twins manager Ron Gardenhire said. ?But it?s a learning process. There?s times where he?ll take off and you say he has no chance, but he outruns the ball sometimes, which is nice to have that kind of makeup speed where you can outrun that mistake.?
Part of that learning experience comes with knowing when to run, as it?s obviously easier to steal on a breaking pitch than a fastball.
?He?s getting better at reading breaking-ball counts,? Gardenhire said. ?Reading when a guy is throwing curveballs or balls in the dirt. So he?s getting better at it. It?s a work in progress.?
MINNEAPOLIS ? The Twins optioned reliever Jeff Manship to Triple-A Rochester after the right-hander allowed three runs on five hits in the sixth inning of the Twins? 12-5 loss to the White Sox on Wednesday.
Minnesota will recall right-handed reliever Kyle Waldrop to take his place on the roster. Waldrop will be available for Friday night?s game against the Royals after Thursday?s off-day.
Manship, 27, posted a 10.27 ERA with five strikeouts, three walks and four homers allowed in eight appearances totaling 10 2/3 innings.
?Jeff has been kind of scuffling,? manager Ron Gardenhire said. ?We?ve all seen that. He hasn?t been able to get through innings. All his pitches are blending together. So he?s got to get back to slowing the ball down and locating the ball better. So we?ll send him back down there to get going.?
Waldrop, meanwhile, has pitched well at Triple-A Rochester, with a 1.26 ERA, five strikeouts and five walks in 14 1/3 innings. The 26-year-old was likely to make the club out of Spring Training, but suffered a right elbow strain in late March.
?Waldrop is back healthy,? Gardenhire said. ?He?s throwing the ball well. We?ll see how he does up here.?
Article source: http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120627&content_id=34017596¬ebook_id=34038438&vkey=notebook_min&c_id=min
james neal jackie robinson virginia tech emancipation proclamation april 16 tornadoes mitch hedberg
During fight weeks, the UFC houses all of their fighters and staff at the same hotel. From Tuesday, when the fighters arrive for pay-per-view events, to Sunday, when they leave, there are plenty of opportunities for awkwardness as opponents see each other in hallways, restaurants and elevators.
Does this mean fights are breaking out left and right, or does it give fighters a chance to be pros who can have fun:
Not surprising to see Wanderlei Silva and Rich Franklin show the latter.
shld 2012 sec football schedule medifast sinead oconnor braylon edwards jimmer fredette mall of america
[ [ [['Connery is an experienced stuntman', 2]], 'http://yhoo.it/KeQd0p', '[Slideshow: See photos taken on the way down]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['Connery is an experienced stuntman', 7]], ' http://yhoo.it/KpUoHO', '[Slideshow: Death-defying daredevils]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['know that we have confidence in', 3]], 'http://yhoo.it/LqYjAX ', '[Related: The Secret Service guide to Cartagena]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['We picked up this other dog and', 5]], 'http://yhoo.it/JUSxvi', '[Related: 8 common dog fears, how to calm them]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['accused of running a fake hepatitis B', 5]], 'http://bit.ly/JnoJYN', '[Related: Did WH share raid details with filmmakers?]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['accused of running a fake hepatitis B', 3]], 'http://bit.ly/KoKiqJ', '[Factbox: AQAP, al-Qaeda in Yemen]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['have my contacts on or glasses', 3]], 'http://abcn.ws/KTE5AZ', '[Related: Should the murder charge be dropped?]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['have made this nation great as Sarah Palin', 5]], 'http://yhoo.it/JD7nlD', '[Related: Bristol Palin reality show debuts June 19]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['have made this nation great as Sarah Palin', 1]], 'http://bit.ly/JRPFRO', '[Related: McCain adviser who vetted Palin weighs in on VP race]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['A JetBlue flight from New York to Las Vegas', 3]], 'http://yhoo.it/GV9zpj', '[Related: View photos of the JetBlue plane in Amarillo]', ' ', '630', ' ', ' ', ], [ [['the 28-year-old neighborhood watchman who shot and killed', 15]], 'http://news.yahoo.com/photos/white-house-stays-out-of-teen-s-killing-slideshow/', 'Click image to see more photos', 'http://l.yimg.com/cv/ip/ap/default/120411/martinzimmermen.jpg', '630', ' ', 'AP', ], [ [['He was in shock and still strapped to his seat', 6]], 'http://news.yahoo.com/photos/navy-jet-crashes-in-virginia-slideshow/', 'Click image to see more photos', 'http://l.yimg.com/cv/ip/ap/default/120406/jet_ap.jpg', '630', ' ', 'AP', ], [ [['xxxxxxxxxxxx', 11]], 'http://news.yahoo.com/photos/russian-grannies-win-bid-to-sing-at-eurovision-1331223625-slideshow/', 'Click image to see more photos', 'http://l.yimg.com/a/p/us/news/editorial/1/56/156d92f2760dcd3e75bcd649a8b85fcf.jpeg', '500', ' ', 'AP', ] ]
[ [ [['did not go as far his colleague', 8]], '29438204', '0' ], [ [[' the 28-year-old neighborhood watchman who shot and killed', 4]], '28924649', '0' ], [ [['because I know God protects me', 14], ['Brian Snow was at a nearby credit union', 5]], '28811216', '0' ], [ [['The state news agency RIA-Novosti quoted Rosaviatsiya', 6]], '28805461', '0' ], [ [['measure all but certain to fail in the face of bipartisan', 4]], '28771014', '0' ], [ [['matter what you do in this case', 5]], '28759848', '0' ], [ [['presume laws are constitutional', 7]], '28747556', '0' ], [ [['has destroyed 15 to 25 houses', 7]], '28744868', '0' ], [ [['short answer is yes', 7]], '28746030', '0' ], [ [['opportunity to tell the real story', 7]], '28731764', '0' ], [ [['entirely respectable way to put off the searing constitutional controversy', 7]], '28723797', '0' ], [ [['point of my campaign is that big ideas matter', 9]], '28712293', '0' ], [ [['As the standoff dragged into a second day', 7]], '28687424', '0' ], [ [['French police stepped up the search', 17]], '28667224', '0' ], [ [['Seeking to elevate his candidacy back to a general', 8]], '28660934', '0' ], [ [['The tragic story of Trayvon Martin', 4]], '28647343', '0' ], [ [['Karzai will get a chance soon to express', 8]], '28630306', '0' ], [ [['powerful storms stretching', 8]], '28493546', '0' ], [ [['basic norm that death is private', 6]], '28413590', '0' ], [ [['songwriter also saw a surge in sales for her debut album', 6]], '28413590', '1', 'Watch music videos from Whitney Houston ', 'on Yahoo! Music', 'http://music.yahoo.com' ], [ [['keyword', 99999999999999999999999]], 'videoID', '1', 'overwrite-pre-description', 'overwrite-link-string', 'overwrite-link-url' ] ]
trisomy 18 ozzie guillen ozzie guillen buster posey eric holder eric holder carole king
<a href="http://www.azgovernor.gov/dms/upload/PR_062512_SB107SCRuling.pdf" target="_hplink">Via her official website:</a> "Today's decision by the U.S. Supreme Court is a victory for the rule of law. It is also a victory for the 10th Amendment and all Americans who believe in the inherent right and responsibility of states to defend their citizens. After more than two years of legal challenges, the heart of SB 1070 can now be implemented in accordance with the U.S. Constitution."
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court has struck down key provisions of Arizona's immigration law. What this decision makes unmistakably clear is that Congress must act on comprehensive immigration reform. A patchwork of state laws is not a solution to our broken immigration system - it's part of the problem." "At the same time, I remain concerned about the practical impact of the remaining provision of the Arizona law that requires local law enforcement officials to check the immigration status of anyone they even suspect to be here illegally. I agree with the Court that individuals cannot be detained solely to verify their immigration status. No American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like. Going forward, we must ensure that Arizona law enforcement officials do not enforce this law in a manner that undermines the civil rights of Americans, as the Court's decision recognizes. Furthermore, we will continue to enforce our immigration laws by focusing on our most important priorities like border security and criminals who endanger our communities, and not, for example, students who earn their education - which is why the Department of Homeland Security announced earlier this month that it will lift the shadow of deportation from young people who were brought to the United States as children through no fault of their own." "I will work with anyone in Congress who's willing to make progress on comprehensive immigration reform that addresses our economic needs and security needs, and upholds our tradition as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And in the meantime, we will continue to use every federal resource to protect the safety and civil rights of all Americans, and treat all our people with dignity and respect. We can solve these challenges not in spite of our most cherished values - but because of them. What makes us American is not a question of what we look like or what our names are. What makes us American is our shared belief in the enduring promise of this country - and our shared responsibility to leave it more generous and more hopeful than we found it."
"<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/mitt-romney-arizona-immigration-law-sb1070-scotus_n_1624618.html" target="_hplink">Today's decision</a> underscores the need for a President who will lead on this critical issue and work in a bipartisan fashion to pursue a national immigration strategy. President Obama has failed to provide any leadership on immigration."
"I welcome the Supreme Court's decision to strike down major provisions of Arizona's S.B. 1070 on federal preemption grounds. Today's ruling appropriately bars the State of Arizona from effectively criminalizing unlawful status in the state and confirms the federal government's exclusive authority to regulate in the area of immigration. "While I am pleased the Court confirmed the serious constitutional questions the government raised regarding Section 2, I remain concerned about the impact of Section 2, which requires law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of any person lawfully stopped or detained when they have reason to suspect that the person is here unlawfully. As the Court itself recognized, Section 2 is not a license to engage in racial profiling and I want to assure communities around this country that the Department of Justice will continue to vigorously enforce federal prohibitions against racial and ethnic discrimination. We will closely monitor the impact of S.B. 1070 to ensure compliance with federal immigration law and with applicable civil rights laws, including ensuring that law enforcement agencies and others do not implement the law in a manner that has the purpose or effect of discriminating against the Latino or any other community. "We will also work to ensure that the verification provision does not divert police officers away from traditional law enforcement efforts in order to enforce federal immigration law, potentially impairing local policing efforts and discouraging crime victims, including children of non-citizens, victims of domestic violence, and asylum seekers, from reporting abuses and crimes out of fear of detention or deportation. We will continue to use every federal resource to protect the safety and civil rights of all Americans."
<a href="http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_phoenix_metro/central_phoenix/video-sheriff-joe-arpaio-talks-sb-1070-dream-act" target="_hplink">Via ABC 15:</a> "Nothing has changed. Of course, the Justice Department is accusing me of racial profiling. Went to court, but we do the right thing, we've been doing it. We'll continue to enforce the laws."
"I am pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that state laws cannot dictate the federal government's immigration enforcement policies or priorities. DHS remains focused on enhancing public safety and the integrity of our border by prioritizing enforcement resources on those who are in the country unlawfully and committing crimes, those who have repeatedly violated our immigration laws, and those who recently crossed our borders illegally. The Court's decision not to strike down Section Two at this time will make DHS' work more challenging. Accordingly, DHS will implement operational enhancements to its programs in Arizona to ensure that the agency can remain focused on its priorities. Over the past three and half years, this Administration has dedicated unprecedented resources to secure the border and to enforcing our nation's immigration laws in a firm and reasonable fashion. We continue to urge Congress to pass comprehensive reform because nothing short of a comprehensive solution will resolve the current patchwork of immigration laws. Finally, it is important to note that today's Supreme Court decision will not impact the memorandum I issued on June 15threlated to prosecutorial discretion eligibility for productive members of society who were brought to the United States as children."
"While we still want to fully review the Supreme Court's decision, today's ruling appears to validate a key component of Arizona's immigration law, SB 1070. The Arizona law was born out of the state's frustration with the burdens that illegal immigration and continued drug smuggling impose on its schools, hospitals, criminal justice system and fragile desert environment, and an administration that chooses to set enforcement policies based on a political agenda, not the laws as written by Congress. We will continue our efforts on behalf of the citizens of Arizona to secure our southern border. We believe Arizonans are better served when state and federal officials work as partners to protect our citizens rather than as litigants in a courtroom."
"The Supreme Court was right to strike down the vast majority of the Arizona law. With three out of the four provisions being struck down, the ruling shows that the Obama administration was right to challenge this law, which was not just ill-advised but also unconstitutional. "I am greatly concerned that the provision putting American citizens in danger of being detained by police unless they carry their immigration papers at all times will lead to a system of racial profiling. This is a strong reminder that ultimately, the responsibility for fixing our nation's broken immigration system lies with Congress. President Obama's decision to defer deportation of young people brought here through no fault of their own was necessary precisely because Republicans have so far refused to work with Democrats on forging common-sense solutions to our immigration challenge that are fair, tough and practical. Immigration reform should continue securing our borders; punish unscrupulous employers who exploit immigrants and undercut American wages; pass the DREAM Act; and require the 11 million who are undocumented to register with the government, learn English, pay fines, pay taxes and go to the end of the line to legalize their status." "Looking ahead to the immigration debate, it is disturbing that Mitt Romney called the unconstitutional Arizona law a 'model' for immigration reform. Laws that legalize discrimination are not compatible with our nation's ideals and traditions of equal rights, and the idea that such an unconstitutional law should serve as a 'model' for national reform is far outside the American mainstream."
"This is as strong a repudiation of the Arizona law as one could expect given that the law has not been implemented yet. Three linchpins of the Arizona law were struck down by a convincing majority of the Court as clearly violating federal law, and a fourth is on thin legal ice. The Court is sending a stern warning to Arizona that the provision allowing local law enforcement to check people's immigration documents cannot be implemented in a discriminatory or draconian way, or it will be thrown out like the rest of the law." "This decision tells us that states cannot take the law into their own hands and makes it clear that the only real solution to immigration reform is a comprehensive federal law. The decision should importune Republicans and Democrats to work together on this issue in a bipartisan way."
"While I am pleased that the Supreme Court struck down the vast majority of Arizona's immigration law, I share the concerns of President Obama and many legal organizations over the decision to leave in place the dangerous 'show-me-your-papers' provision. This provision of the law keeps the door open to blatant discrimination against American citizens, minorities, and immigrants. The Court has said this section needs additional review, and I am hopeful that it will be struck down in the future. "The Supreme Court's ruling is a clear reminder of the urgent need to enact comprehensive immigration reform. Democrats have always been ready to work across the aisle and pass legislation without further delay. However, Republicans have chosen a confrontational course - calling Arizona's law a 'model' for reform; refusing to pass the DREAM Act; and standing in the way of bipartisan action to pass real reform. "No state should be in the business of weakening civil rights. Moving forward, we must act to uphold our values by fighting for reform that secures our borders, upholds the rule of law, protects our workers, unites families, and provides a pathway to legalization."
<a href="https://twitter.com/AndreiCherny/status/217264814148431872" target="_hplink">Via Twitter:</a> "The fact remains about #SB1070 that its a bad law. Arpaio needs to be held accountable not given more powers. Congress must act on reform."
Via <a href="http://azsenatedems.blogspot.com/2012/06/statements-on-sb1070-ruling.html" target="_hplink">AZ Senate Dems</a>: "The Supreme Court has sent two messages today: that states cannot pass policies that undermine federal law and that Congress must act on comprehensive reform in order to address this issue and avoid these kinds of legal conflicts. We cannot begin to honestly solve the issue of illegal immigration until those in Congress are willing to have meaningful discussions on comprehensive reform." "Recently, the President took action because of the failure of Congress to act. Predictably, the knee-jerk reaction of extremists like Jan Brewer and her Tea Party Republicans was to trash good policy in favor of their worn-out politics of the past. This is exactly the type of politics that is taking Arizona backwards." "It's time for Arizona to turn to a new chapter, to leave behind the extreme and divisive politics that have dominated this state. It's time to work together to create jobs and improve education, things that Governor Brewer and her Tea Party Republicans in the Legislature have failed to do."
Via <a href="http://azsenatedems.blogspot.com/2012/06/statements-on-sb1070-ruling.html" target="_hplink">AZ Senate Dems</a>: "After President Obama's bold move on immigration, people who for all intents and purposes are living as Americans and contributing to our society are able to step out of the shadows, live without fear of deportation and keep working and going to school here." "SB1070 has created a hostile environment for Latinos in Arizona and has done nothing but pander to the extreme political right while damaging Arizona's reputation and economy at a time we can least afford. The people of Arizona are tired of these partisan Republican games." "Americans favor President Obama's policy change by a two-to-one margin. Even the Arizona GOP spokesman admitted that it might be time for that party to reconsider its Russell Pearce approach to immigration." "The truth is, it's long past time and today's ruling doesn't change the fact that Arizona's Republican-led legislature has done nothing to create jobs or restore the devastating cuts they have made to our kids' schools." --
"For decades, politicians in Washington have talked about this problem, but nothing ever gets done and Arizonans continue to shoulder the burden of a broken immigration system. SB 1070 is a product of the federal government's failure to act. Today's ruling does not help us secure the border, and it does not provide a solution for the 400,000 undocumented people living in Arizona." "As a deputy sheriff of a border county, I've witnessed first hand the human cost of not having a workable solution. I've seen the results of the violence and drugs, and I know the terrible toll that has taken on our community. But SB 1070 doesn't help local law enforcement fix the problem. It's a distraction that hinders our ability to build trust with the communities we serve." "Our immigration problems are complex, but the solutions are simple: secure the border, develop a pathway to earn legal status and enact the DREAM Act. Leadership on this issue takes courage, but it also requires politicians to stop using immigration as a wedge issue to score political points." "It wasn't long ago that two diametrically opposed leaders -- President George W. Bush and the late Senator Ted Kennedy -- came together to try to solve the problem. There was even a time when Senator John McCain and Congressman Jeff Flake favored a comprehensive approach that was practical and fair. It's going to take a more honest debate and the political will to get it done - and that's what's been missing in Washington."
"I am disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision today, which limits the ability of states to protect their citizens and communities from illegal immigrants. It is the federal government's job to enforce our immigration laws, but President Obama has willfully neglected this responsibility. This dereliction of duty has left states to address the crime, job loss, and other costs of illegal immigration. "Unfortunately, under this Administration, today's ruling essentially puts an end to immigration enforcement since the states no longer can step in and fill the void created by the Obama administration. This is especially bad news for border states since they have to deal with border violence, drug trafficking and illegal immigration. "Throughout the past three years, President Obama and his administration have ignored our immigration laws and have encouraged more illegal immigration by their actions. President Obama has abused his executive branch authority to allow potentially millions of illegal immigrants to live and work in the U.S. And under this Administration, worksite enforcement has plummeted 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to hold jobs while 13 million Americans are looking for work. "According to a recent poll, two-thirds of the American people want to see our laws enforced. But President Obama puts illegal immigrants and his partisan agenda ahead of the interests of the American people. If our immigration laws are going to be enforced, we need a new President this January who will enforce immigration laws, not deliberately ignore them." (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
"I find it unfortunate that the Supreme Court struck down some provisions of S.B. 1070. The federal government has failed spectacularly in its duty to enforce immigration laws, and Arizona's law simply sought to fill the enforcement void left by this failure. I'm glad to see the court uphold the central part of this law however. "Under this ruling, police will have the opportunity to check the legal status of individuals in the course of enforcing other laws. This is a major victory in Arizona's efforts to give law enforcement new tools to enforce the law where the Obama Administration will not. Until we obtain operational control of our southern border and fully enforce current laws, we can't have a credible, substantive conversation on immigration reform. By enhancing the enforcement of our immigration laws, this ruling puts us on that path."
"Once again we are reminded that President Obama has failed to keep his promise on immigration reform. In the absence of presidential leadership, states have acted on their own to serve their people and enforce the law, but the issue cannot fully be resolved with a president unwilling to keep his promises. This decision makes that job even more difficult, and it leaves Americans waiting for a plan the president promised to deliver years ago."
"The Supreme Court dealt a blow to the anti-immigrant movement, but also dealt a blow to Latinos and immigrants living in the United States. This threatens the safety of all Americans and undermines the fundamental relationship between police and the communities they serve, and I am proud that Chicago is not going down that road." "A central part of the law, which requires state and local law enforcement to check someone's citizenship status in the course of their duties, was upheld and will sanction pretextual stops and racial profiling. This gives a green light to Arizona sheriffs and others to use someone's clothing, accent, or appearance to take them to jail and hold them until their immigration status, if any, is sorted out." "Experience has shown us that police are highly unlikely to stop an individual with the last name of Kennedy or Roberts on suspicion of not being a legal U.S. citizen, but if you are a Gutierrez or Martinez, watch out. The express goal of the authors of Arizona's SB1070 is to target immigrants for harassment and make their lives miserable, and a key tool in that effort was upheld by the Court." "In our nation's history, the Supreme Court has been at its best when it expands freedom and demands that all Americans are treated fairly. This court fell short of that ideal today. Leaders who understand that allowing police to target anyone they choose, including American citizens, simply based on the way they look, or the sound of their voice, is wrong and has no place in our great country." "The President and Attorney General fought hard against the Arizona law and deserve praise for their leadership. Much of this decision is a victory for our community. This President is not afraid to do the right thing when faced with injustice. Now the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice and the White House have an even more important role in making sure federal immigration laws are not further undermined by and dictated by the states." "The President must stand firm because only the federal government can deport someone or turn a routine traffic stop into a lifetime of exile or a family permanently split apart." "The President's announcement last Friday is all the more important because the Supreme Court has moved to allow states to pick up thousands of low priority deportable immigrants, who could potentially flood already overtaxed deportation resources. Affirmatively protecting DREAM-eligible young immigrants from deportation will help mitigate the damage done by state legislators and the Supreme Court." "Now that leadership from our President is even more vital, it is important to note that Mitt Romney has called the Arizona law -- much of which was just deemed unconstitutional by the nation's highest court -- a "model for the nation." He counts on the main architect of this now-discredited law as a key immigration advisor. Today, the difference in leadership between President Obama and Mr. Romney could not be clearer. I urge Mr. Romney to repudiate his support for a policy now found to be largely unconstitutional."
"Today's decision is a victory for all Americans in that the Court correctly affirmed the power of the federal government to set immigration policy. While the Court found that the 'show me your papers' provision requires further evaluation, the Court concluded that it too may be invalidated if it is improperly applied in violation of federal law, including civil rights protections. I am deeply concerned about the welfare of Arizona residents in the meantime, particularly that the 'show me your papers' provision could lead to racial profiling. "We need an immigration system that's fair and practical, not a patchwork of policies that make our broken system worse. The federal government must create a national immigration system that provides for our national security and upholds America's values. That's why I'm working with my colleagues to pursue comprehensive immigration reform."
"While it's heartening that the Supreme Court rejected several parts of Arizona's radical immigration law, I am deeply disappointed they did not strike down the most discriminatory portion that will force even more people into the shadows. I have opposed this law from the beginning while my opponent, Senator Dean Heller, not only supports it, but wants to bring it here to Nevada. We cannot allow that to happen. "Today's decision is further evidence that we must pass comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, cracks down on employers that knowingly hire undocumented immigrants, and provides a pathway to legal status for those that go to the back of the line, learn English, pay a fine and back taxes, and pass a criminal background check. "Unfortunately, Washington Republicans like Senator Heller are continuing to block any progress on fixing our broken immigration system and passing commonsense legislation like the DREAM Act."
"The federal government can put an end to all this uncertainty by enforcing the law--at the border and in the workplace. Several provisions of the Arizona law might have been invalidated, but an important part of the law is still in place, so there will be a lot of attention on this one aspect, and how it relates to state-based enforcement. "Arizona's efforts are indicative of a much bigger problem--a problem that in large part sits with the federal government. If this Administration truly believes immigration enforcement is a federal duty, then it wouldn't try to routinely circumvent the law as it has done. Arizona had no other option and the state did what it needed to do for the protection of its citizens."
"The Supreme Court's decision today regarding SB 1070 is a mixed bag at best. But one thing is certain: with its efforts suing Arizona, the Obama Administration has focused time and resources that could have been better spent securing the border."
"This decision is a mixed bag. Illegal immigration hurts our country in numerous ways and it is sad that states are doing more to enforce our immigration laws than the federal government. President Obama recently decided to impose his liberal immigration policies by fiat, ignoring the rule of law. The President and his Administration are not above the law. "Last week I introduced a bill, the VERIFI Act, which will take one small step toward addressing the problem of illegal immigration. Currently, most government benefit programs, like Medicare and Social Security, do not require a verification of citizenship. This means that illegal immigrants can access benefits that they are not legally allowed to have. This is called cheating. My bill would close this door by requiring a citizenship check before receiving benefits. It's a simple idea that we should act on quickly."
"I am pleased that the decision announced by the Supreme Court struck down the bulk of Arizona's immigration law. It is a clear sign that changes to the way we approach undocumented immigrants must take place at the federal level. Democrats are committed to comprehensive immigration reform, and we will continue to propose solutions that reflect our need for secure borders and the reality that millions of people, including many children who were brought here through no fault of their own, have been living and working in our country for years. "I remain concerned by the section of the Arizona law that was upheld today, and its practical implications. Judging people on the basis of race or ethnicity goes against our nation's most fundamental values of equality and justice for all. Democrats will continue to watch with great interest as cases concerning the constitutionality of that provision make their way through the courts, and until that happens, we expect our legal system to ensure that it is applied in a completely non-discriminatory fashion. Democrats will continue standing up for the civil liberties of all Americans and for the pursuit of comprehensive immigration reform, and I call on Republicans to work with us toward both ends."
"Today's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Arizona law, better known as SB 1070, is a move in the right direction. However, the unanimous decision to uphold the 'Show Me Your Papers' provision that allows a police officer or local law enforcement agency to ask for the legal status of a person being detained or arrested hurts communities across our country. This ruling underscores the need for Congress to take up this federal issue and work on a Comprehensive Immigration Reform package that addresses it. "I call on my colleagues - both Democrats and Republicans - to do the right thing and address Comprehensive Immigration Reform. It is unfortunate that partisan politics being played by the Republican majority in the House of Representatives does not allow us, those with common sense, to move meaningful and important immigration legislation forward. "For 26 ? years, I served as a Border Patrol agent and then sector chief and worked to uphold immigration laws in this country, and today, I know first-hand the dire need to reform these same laws. I will continue to support Comprehensive Immigration Reform that secures our country, unites families, helps our country's economic prosperity and ends a shadow world for millions of people living here."
On Monday's edition of <a href="http://jstsay.in/0006an" target="_hplink">The Huckabee Report</a> "The great news is that the central provision of the Arizona law has been upheld by the Supreme Court. And, you know, that's great. It's the provision that allows Arizona state and local police to have a state-wide policy of acting whoever they have reasonable suspicion that a person is unlawfully present in the country and calling the Feds and getting an answer -- a 24/7 hotline the federal government has. So that is upheld. But the other provisions of the Arizona law that were at issue before the court were struck down. The issue is it's a decision written by Justice Kennedy, and it's kind of classic Kennedy. You know, really splitting hairs and going one way on one part of the law and one way on the other part of the law. I was hoping for a more principled or across-the-board decision written by maybe somebody like Chief Justice Roberts or solid conservatives."
"I supported the Obama Administration's decision to question the constitutionality of this law, and I'm pleased that the Supreme Court struck down most of the ill-conceived provisions within this law. However, I am concerned that the "show me your papers" provision was upheld. We must pursue a comprehensive immigration policy so that no American has to live in fear because of their heritage, their last name, or the color of their skin. "This ruling underscores the need for a comprehensive immigration policy that works for all states and all Americans, without compromising our values or undermining the basic civil rights and freedoms we have as Americans. As a Member of Congress, representing a diverse and vibrant population in South Florida, I know that our country deserves better. I look forward to working with my fellow Members of Congress and the President toward comprehensive immigration reform so that all Americans can prosper in a free and secure nation."
"I am pleased that the Court struck down three of the four provisions at stake in this divisive law. While our nation's immigration system is in desperate need of reform, enacting patchwork policies that conflict with existing federal laws and Constitutional rights is not the solution. "I was disappointed, however, to see the Court uphold one of the law's most controversial provisions, requiring law enforcement officials to check the status of persons that they arrest if they suspect them of being in the country illegally. This provision sets a dangerous precedent for profiling and discrimination throughout the nation. While we do need to address the illegal immigration problems in our country, directing law enforcement officials to become involved in immigration issues may lead to a rift between legal immigrant populations and communities and local and state law enforcement. This rift could hinder their ability to investigate dangerous criminal activity. The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are already properly trained and in a better position than local and state officers when it comes to involvement in these complex immigration matters. "As such, I will continue to work in Congress to address our nation's immigration issues in a comprehensive manner, which does not promote discriminatory policies."
"It's great to see the 'show me your papers' provision of the Arizona immigration law has been upheld. The federal government continues to fail the states with its refusal to actually enforce immigration laws, forcing states like Arizona and Georgia to step in and figure out a way to fix their own illegal immigration problems. While it was disappointing to have the Supreme Court strike down some of the teethier provisions of the law, allowing the 'show me your papers' provision to remain sets a precedent to allow states to implement immigration laws when the federal government fails to do so. "We don't know what this might mean for the Georgia law. The Obama Administration has not filed suit against Georgia yet - although they have filed suit against South Carolina, Alabama, and Utah for similar immigration laws - and we don't know if they plan to in the future. But at least the Court's decision does at least leave the door open for states to take care of what Washington has continued to fail to do. This gives Georgia a good argument in favor of our law if the president ever does sue to block it."
"The Supreme Court today reaffirmed Georgia's right to enforce its immigration law and protect our taxpayers. Illegal immigration is one of the biggest crises facing our nation, and I am hopeful this victory stands once it returns to the lower courts. Given the Obama administration's refusal to secure our borders, it is of paramount importance that states be able address the issue in their local communities."
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court struck down three out of the four key provisions of Arizona's dangerous immigration law. The ruling shows that the Obama Administration was right to challenge the law's constitutionality and reaffirms the notion that the federal government should frame immigration law, not states. However, I share President Obama's deep concern that the Supreme Court left in place the discriminatory 'stop and check' provision, or the ability for state and local law enforcement to require documentation based on how people look or how they speak. These practices promote racial profiling, compromise equal protection under the law and have already led to credible allegations of wrongful arrests and harassment. I support President Obama's call for the full protection of civil rights for all. Our immigration system is broken, and today's decision underscores the need for national comprehensive immigration reform. We made a major step forward last week, when President Obama announced a policy to halt the deportation of young undocumented individuals, the so-called DREAMERs. Yet Republicans continue to stand in the way of long-term solutions like the DREAM Act, which would allow young undocumented individuals to join the military or go to college and have a path to citizenship. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has also called Arizona's unconstitutional immigration policies, a "model" for the nation. Our country is at its best when its sticks to core founding principles - equality, fairness, opportunity for all. Congress must reform our immigration policies in a commonsense way that reflects our values and moves us forward."
"I applaud the Court for making a balanced and positive ruling today. The most important thing to be determined was whether state and local law enforcement officers can play a role and assist the federal government in enforcing immigration law and the answer is yes. This is a significant victory for those on a state level who are trying to gain control of the massive flow of illegal immigrants into our country. It is clear the problem will never be solved without cooperation from the very top of the federal government and the very bottom of local jurisdictions. The Supreme Court decided that cooperation is constitutionally proper. "This ruling further highlights the long overdue necessity for statutory change to the status quo of lax immigration enforcement, half-hearted border security measures and the elimination of the economic incentives and public benefits that encourage the massive flow of illegal immigration into this country. Thankfully, we have a Court that will give issues like this the honest consideration it deserves."
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court has struck down key provisions of Arizona's immigration law, but I'm concerned that the 'show me your papers' provision that is still intact casts a wide net over all people of Hispanic descent, and will undoubtedly snare honest, hardworking Americans in a misguided attempt to deport undocumented immigrants. "Arizona's legislation was the wrong reaction to a very real issue. Passing laws that institutionalize racial profiling is no solution. "I am proud that here in New Mexico we value our diverse heritage. Congress must rise to the challenge and fix this broken system at the federal level once and for all."
"In their immigration decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the enforcement of immigration laws is a federal responsibility and that no state has the right to discriminate against its own people. "I was disappointed that one provision was upheld, but the Supreme Court sent a clear message that if the measure is not implemented narrowly - to help federal officials enforce immigration law - it will not stand."
"When three out of four provisions of a state's law are struck down, it obviously can't be viewed as a victory for the state. Nor can an unconstitutional law be used a model for the nation, as Governor Romney suggested. The fact the Romney has said that as president he would not even challenge Arizona's law, shows what a sad direction our country's immigration laws would go under his administration. "The 'show me your papers' provision, that institutionalizes racial profiling, remains a very important element that needs to be addressed. The CHC will coordinate with civil rights groups and immigration law organizations to follow up on a challenge to this provision, which is still an open legal question. We will be watching very closely how Arizona exercises this part of the law and will continue to fight against instances of racial and ethnic profiling."
"In recognizing that federal immigration laws preempt SB 1070, the Supreme Court rightly found three of four harmful provisions unconstitutional, but I'm greatly disappointed that it erroneously upheld the discriminatory 'show me your papers' provision. I'm fearful this troublesome provision will lead to discrimination and racial profiling in Arizona and throughout the country, and I remain supportive of related civil rights suits currently challenging SB 1070 as discriminatory, which was not considered in this most recent Supreme Court case. Further, I ask the U.S. Department of Justice to be aware of efforts to restrict the civil rights of citizens and immigrants alike and increase civil rights enforcement. "Arizona's SB 1070, Section 2(B), the "show me your papers" provision, requires local law enforcement to check the immigration status during any lawful stop, detention or arrest anytime law enforcement officials have "reasonable suspicion" that the individual is unlawfully present. Upholding Section 2(B) will result in the harassment of those here legally, including tourists, legal immigrants and even U.S. citizens and place significant burdens on federal agencies by diverting resources away from dangerous criminals and other high-priority individuals."
"While I am pleased that the Supreme Court has wisely decided to strike down several of the most egregious portions of SB 1070, I am disheartened that the law's infamous "show me your papers" provision will remain intact. Not only is this an affront to the American ideal of equal justice under law, it will open the door to rampant racial profiling. Thankfully, in striking down three other key elements of SB 1070, the justices have once again reaffirmed the primacy of the federal government in enforcing our immigration laws. Most Americans understand that a patchwork of state laws in the mold of SB 1070 won't get us any closer to solving this national challenge. What we need now more than ever is for the leaders of both parties to work together with President Obama to finally fix our broken immigration system."
Rep. Nydia M. Vel?zquez (NY-12): "While I am pleased the Court struck down several of the constitutionally questionable provisions in this law, I remain concerned that it upheld elements that could still allow for racial profiling. Regardless, this issue is not going away. We must continue working for an immigration reform law that addresses these issues in a comprehensive manner."
"The ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on the Arizona anti-immigration law does not go far enough in preventing the unjust harassment of anyone who looks Latino or sounds 'foreign.' Letting stand a provision that requires police to check someone's status because they "suspect" them of coming into the country illegally is preposterous. Your grandmother or little brother can be walking to the corner grocery story and be stopped and detained if they look "suspicious." Our Constitution must guarantee that all people - no matter where they were born or what color skin they have are afforded the same basic rights and treated equally. While I am pleased that some of this unconstitutional law was defeated, it still leaves the door open for bigotry and harassment to prevail."
"The Supreme Court's decision to reject most aspects of Arizona's SB 1070 upholds the Constitution of the United States, and makes it clear that immigration should be exclusively the jurisdiction of the federal government. But I am disappointed that the Court upheld the discriminatory 'show me your papers' provision of the law. If implemented, this misguided provision will inevitably lead to racial profiling. Some Americans will be forced to prove their citizenship based on the color of their skin while others will stand little or no chance of being affected. This is wrong. The CHC will continue to fight to overturn this immoral and unjust provision, and pass a comprehensive immigration that respects the law of the land and our history as a nation of immigrants."
"Today the U.S. Supreme Court struck down key parts of Arizona's SB 1070 that would have gone beyond federal law to criminalize currently civil violations. Unfortunately, the Court upheld the discriminatory provision in the state law that promotes unjustified questioning based on stereotypes of what an undocumented immigrant looks like or sounds like. With similar laws pending in several states, it is critical that the full impact of SB 1070 be understood. Allowing SB 1070's 'show me your papers' provision to go into effect will have devastating consequences on Latino communities throughout the country. "It is now more important than ever that Congress gets serious about passing comprehensive immigration reform to address our broken immigration system. The U.S. Government must also continue to exercise its authority to shape and enforce just and humane immigration policies."
"While the Supreme Court decision struck down a number of the provisions of SB 1070 and reaffirmed that immigration requires a solution at the federal level, I do have concerns with the part of the law that was left in place," Congressman Ben Ray Luj?n said. "This decision serves as yet another reminder of the importance of passing comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level that fixes our broken system."
"I think the Court's decision--striking down three of four sections in the Arizona law and suggesting the fourth section will also be struck down if it is interpreted by Arizona courts as giving too much discretion to state officers--is thoughtful and comprehensive. It indicates that Arizona's legislature overstepped its authority in key respects, and reinforces the federal government's primacy with respect to establishing and enforcing our nation's immigration laws."
"Today the Supreme Court preserved the most important component of the Arizona law- the provision that allows law enforcement, when reasonable suspicion standards are met, to request that an individual produce identification and verify their immigration status," said King. "This is a significant win when it comes to efforts to increase enforcement of our nation's immigration laws. However, I have serious concerns about the other side of today's ruling, which struck down three other provisions of SB 1070. The three provisions were written to mirror and support federal immigration law. Today's decision makes it harder for states to protect their citizens from the crime wave of illegal immigration driven by drug smuggling. I will now look for a statutory fix that will empower the states. The President refuses to enforce immigration law himself, and he doesn't want anyone else to enforce the laws either."
"All the Arizona law tried to do was fill the void that the federal government has created by neglecting its duty and letting illegal immigration get completely out of control," Vitter said. "The federal government should be working with Arizona to solve the problem, not taking it to court. But for those of us who believe our focus should be actively enforcing the federal laws already on the books, the court's decision to uphold Arizona's ability to check immigration status is a step forward."
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court struck down most provisions of Arizona's immigration law today. SB 1070 law was discriminatory and would have encouraged police officers to engage in racial profiling and make warrantless arrests by creating new state criminal offenses for undocumented immigrants. I am disappointed, however, that the Court upheld the 'show me your papers' part of the Arizona law which authorizes law enforcement officers to stop an individual if there is 'reasonable suspicion' they are undocumented immigrants. This provision will encourage racial profiling and discriminatory enforcement by law enforcement officers, wasting valuable time and resources that would be better used for legitimate law enforcement activity. I expect this provision to continue to be challenged in court once it actually takes effect and is used by Arizona law enforcement officers. "In light of this decision, I would encourage the Justice Department to continue protecting the civil rights of all Americans. Congress also now has to take action. First, we must pass the <a href="http://www.cardin.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/-cardin-introduces-bill-to-end-racial-profiling-by-law-enforcement" target="_hplink">End Racial Profiling Act, S. 1670</a>, legislation I introduced that would prohibit racial profiling by federal, state, and local law enforcement officers. The bill also requires training of law enforcement officers on the issue of racial profiling. Second, Congress must finally break the gridlock that is holding back comprehensive immigration reform. We must work together to find a balanced approach that reforms our current immigration laws, secures our borders and creates a fair process to bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows and into compliance with our laws."
"The Court's decision today is another reminder that the federal government needs to deal with our broken immigration system. I believe the first step is securing the border and turning off the magnets that encourage people to come into country illegally. We are a nation of immigrants and should fix the system to make it easier for people seeking to enter our country legally, but we are also a nation of laws that have to be respected and observed. Elizabeth Warren has the wrong approach. She supports amnesty and taxpayer funded benefits, including in-state college tuition, for those in the country illegally. She wants to make illegal immigration more attractive. I want to strengthen our legal immigration system and provide more opportunities for those who have played by the rules."
"While the court ruled that portions of Arizona's immigration law are preempted by federal law, the ability for state law enforcement officials to verify a person's immigration status was upheld. Today's ruling highlights the fact that President Obama has not provided leadership in working with Congress to adequately secure our nation's borders and provide comprehensive immigration reform that is beyond amnesty for those who have broken our laws. It is precisely because the federal government has failed to do its job of securing the border, protecting citizens, and deporting those who are here illegally that states like Arizona have sought to take matters into their own hand. For four years, our nation has needed leadership from the President to tackle this issue. Unfortunately, Americans are still waiting."
"The Supreme Court reaffirmed what the Constitution makes clear: Congress has the authority to make laws setting our national immigration policy. By striking down three of the four provisions at issue in the case, the Court sent anti-immigrant activists a strong message. A patchwork of conflicting immigration laws is not a sustainable result, and I am pleased that the Supreme Court recognized that in striking down a number of overreaching provisions in the Arizona law. "Although the Court did not strike down a section of the Arizona law that would require police officers to check an individual's immigration status upon a stop or an arrest, the majority made clear that its application could raise serious constitutional questions. I share those concerns. "The reluctance of some in Congress to work to meet our immigration challenges recently led the President and the Secretary of Homeland Security to act under their authority to devise an immigration enforcement policy that is consistent with America's values, history and traditions. I applauded the President and Secretary Napolitano for their actions, but Congress must act to make the lasting improvements our system needs. I hope today's decision will encourage congressional Republicans to join with us to enact comprehensive immigration reform."
the shining mariano rivera mariano rivera jobs report tiger woods masters 2012 nikki haley stan van gundy
