.in his dissent from a portion of the Court's decision in Arizona vs. The United States. The last two paragraphs (page 52 of the document) read as follows:
Arizona bears the brunt of the country’s illegal immigration problem. Its citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy. Federal officials have been unable to remedy the problem, and indeed have recently shown that they are unwilling to do so....
Arizona has moved to protect its sovereignty—not in contradiction of federal law, but in complete compliance with it. The laws under challenge here do not extend or revise federal immigration restrictions, but merely enforce those restrictions more effectively. If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State.
Related, from the New York Post:
Barack Obama doesn’t listen to anyone who disagrees with him. He sees his election as a blank check that carries near-absolute power and freedom from all restraint. Congress, the courts, voters, whole industries — if they are not with him, they are obstacles that must be crushed or circumvented.
Justice Scalia sees the game for what it is. Alas, the media is unlikely to discuss or even report his remarks, despite the implications of his dissent. No doubt they are aware that most of the electorate would likely agree with Scalia, and they fear bringing this jurist's thoughts to light would "angry up the blood" of the American people even further.
Can't have that. Not with an election on the horizon, ones whose outcome is far from certain. For the media, it is Obama über alles.
Which echos the ethos of our president, of course.
Justice Scalia is aware of that, too....