This transcript is automatically generated
And has anti legal immigration law that was set to go into effect this Thursday.
Could share -- saying she block the law until September 20 ninth in order to give her more time to review lawsuits filed against it.
Joining me now for more on this latest decision Alberto card and -- junior and attorney serves as counsel to business interest affected by immigration laws also former General Counsel.
The senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and Chris coal -- The Kansas secretary of state -- co author of Arizona's anti illegal immigration -- right Chris let me start -- -- was this the right decision by -- Alabama judge in your mind.
Well it's a good decision by the Alabama judge in the sense that she is giving this issue the kind of attention it deserves.
I've argued these immigration preemption cases all over the country.
And I've seen some federal judges who rushed to judge night I saw one -- -- and -- -- mentioned she actually came into the hearing with her decision already written.
And in contrast judge Blackburn as saying hey this is a serious issue she had over 300 pages of briefs to digest.
And the law -- that's going to affect on September 1 and she said you know what.
I need another month to thoroughly get this right -- at the hearing last Wednesday she showed that she already was learning the issues very carefully because.
She was throwing some really tough questions of the Department of Justice attorneys -- Obama administration is attacking this law.
And making some really absurd arguments against the state of Alabama and the -- and seeing through them -- -- you agree with that.
I do agree that they could delay is necessary when you have to review the facts and got to receive the -- we don't wanna rush to judgment we -- fair.
And impartial decision and in this case.
A delay -- the twenty ninth of September seems pretty reasonable.
The dole Chris okay how was Alabama's lied different from Arizona's how does it compare and contrast I think that's a big question that a lot of people out there that is.
When a nation we have one federal law which we have fifty different state laws and how different -- each one of these laws be.
Well the -- -- state laws are drafted -- had a hand in both is they are drafted to be a mirror image a federal law so.
Anything that has penalized.
Under Alabama or Arizona -- something that's already prohibited by federal law.
So the idea contrary to what some of the critics of these -- say they're not creating a patchwork quilt they're actually.
Creating uniformity because they're they're basically reinforcing what already prohibited the prohibited behavior in -- federal law.
Yes the question how is it different from Arizona's Alabama's goes a little bit further for example it says.
That if you have a contract with someone who's an illegal alien and you know that the person that illegal -- and your contract.
Requires that person or contemplates that person staying illegally in the country.
It's not -- And I think that's a common sense way of saying look we're not gonna have our legal system facilitating.
The illegal presence of people breaking federal law.
You know bad no Texas governor of repairing wants to build -- federal government for cost incurred by his state.
In terms of by enforcing illegal -- -- illegal immigration.
-- the prevention of illegal immigration and He says the federal government should have been doing all along.
This could said in a given up a precedent that it would be important for every state in terms of who's gonna pay for what don't you think.
It could set a precedent look you could you have the state criminal alien assistance program and thank god for leaders like John Carter from taxes He was able to.
Get secure -- funding for the at this current fiscal year that's up in consideration of congress.
These state criminal alien assistance program obviously assist local counties in jails and they've got to apply for the funds.
To house the undocumented immigrants what you need to look at is.
As we mentioned before uniformity.
And in this particular case yes the governor may be setting a precedent He could also set a precedent by sending National Guard troops to the border and -- the federal government for that.
There are different ways to -- president I don't know.
That this particular bill get paid by the federal government.
You know Chris today Janet upon -- Oklahoma security head of Homeland Security said.
No we don't really need to increase the number of deportations that we have right now we have 400000.
It is it is long as we abide by the new rules and start focusing on deporting the criminal element.
On it it'll make it more effective what do you think about what she said today.
I thought it was outrageous.
Look we have had periods where we have deported many more than 400000 our capacity in the United States government is to deport.
Well over half a million in Indian in some cases you can -- 700000 quite easily.
For her to say that we -- only -- -- be folks focusing now on the illegal aliens who have committed additional crimes beyond their immigration crimes is essentially her saying.
You know what the immigration crimes in and of themselves aren't really all that big a deal and and she doesn't think there were Lehman forcing.
And let me add one more point.
I was in the Department of Justice during the Bush Administration when the department Homeland Security was created.
And one of the reasons that congress had for creating the department's security was so that there would be.
Focus on immigration laws and there would be more of enforcement approach approach to then focus.
It appears that secretary Napolitano is undermining the very purpose -- agency she sang at the immigration laws and of themselves not so important.
-- -- -- -- Paul Thomas says congress only -- enough money.
The booed out 400000 and no more so while we get rid of the worst 400000.
Well why don't we appropriate more money than to get rid of the worst that we need to get rid I think that's.
That you know it's a question about how many we need to get rid.
You know people can figure that -- -- in terms of how many people wanna get out of in kick out of this country or how many people they want to stay in this country that contribute to our economy.
I look at this is a you know we don't wanna set a bar in terms of we can only deport so many that might be to lower might be too -- to -- but.
What we should look at is where we need more money let's put more money and what we need to hire more staff.
To be able to get the criminals thugs and individuals were committing crimes out of this country out let's go ahead and do that.
So that take money from somewhere else then banks failing card they'll cut in -- interest called out we appreciate -- Jones Trestle is I.