Pro-immigration enforcement groups across the country are sighing with relief today because the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Arizona's appeal in the suit filed by the Eric Holder Justice Department against Arizona's SB-1070. FIRE Coalition is not among that group.

As Americans, we claim to be a nation of laws, and yet, we regularly ignore the "supreme" law of the land, the U.S. Constitution. How can we ever expect to restore sanity, honesty, and integrity in government from our elected officials when we thank (even brag on) them for violating their oaths of office?

U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 reads:  (emphasis added)

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.

QUESTION: The U.S. Supreme Court has "appellate jurisdiction" over what types of cases?

ANSWER: ALL THE OTHER CASES (that don't have an ambassador, public minister, consuls, or... wait for it... a STATE as a party!)

The statesmen (Framers / Founding Fathers) didn't give the lesser courts authority to hear cases against a State. The statesmen who drafted, adopted, and ratified the U.S. Constitution preserved the front-of-the-line sovereign right to have their cases heard by the highest court "they"created.

It's just that simple.

 QUESTION: Did the statesmen (Framers / Founding Fathers) give the U.S. Supreme Court authority to hear cases against a sovereign State on appeal?

 ANSWER: Of course not. Why would they? They had already established that such cases would be heard in "the first instance" by the Supreme Court.

 The term "original jurisdiction" only appears ONCE in the entire Constitution, and is used in reference to cases against "sovereigns."

This fact was further acknowledged by the "statesmen" (Framers / Founding Fathers) who served in the 1st Congress when they set about to write the Judiciary Act of 1789. In that document, instead of "original jurisdiction" they used the term "exclusive" in reference to cases within the federal judiciary that had a "State" as a party.

According to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall, for the high court to take jurisdiction that was not authorized in the Constitution, or to refuse to exercise jurisdiction required of it by the Constitution would mean only one thing.

The perpetrators of such behavior would be committing "TREASON AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION."

Congress can't give the Supreme Court authority to do anything that the Constitution doesn't authorize, and the Supreme Court can't give such authority to itself. That would be treason according to both the Constitution and Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall.

So...

Is it a happy day that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear the case (on appeal) against Arizona's SB-1070?

Not even remotely. One act of treason doesn't justify another, and using an un-Constitutional statute to try a case against a sovereign State in a court that has no Constitutional authority to hear it is nothing to get happy about.

Some pundits have suggested that Arizona 'chose' to not exercise its "original jurisdiction" rights. Not being a lawyer, I can understand why some lawyers have dificulty understanding that the Constitution trumps ALL laws, including 28 USC 1251, 1331, and 1345.

Those are the statutes used to establish "jurisdiction and venue" in inferior federal courts against sovereign states. They are the type of un-Constitutional law that Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall referred to as "repugnant" to the Constitution.

Pardon me if I don't thank the traitors who are participating in these court cases for betraying their oaths. What's your excuse for tolerating treason?

We notified ALL the parties involved in the un-Constitutional lawsuits against Arizona, and those against ObamaCare in Virginia nearly 1.5 years ago.

See: http://rejoinordie.com/docs/REJOINORDIE.pdf

Ask the citizens of Arizona, Alabama, South Carolina, and Utah if they feel their attorney general should be groveling on bended-knee before the U.S. Supreme Court, effectively "begging for an audience" in a court they created.

Until we restore Constitutional governance, these usurpations will only get worse. Eventually, if We the People don't get our heads out of our proverbial butts, the Constitution will just be another grim fairy tale.