On June 8, Hillary Clinton appeared on Ecuadorean television saying the Justice Department was "bringing a lawsuit against" Arizona's controversial immigration law. The interview went largely under the radar until Thursday when a right-wing blogger posted a video of the broadcast. The post made a big splash because, officially, the Justice Department is merely reviewing the law (though a federal challenge has been rumored). Perhaps unsurprisingly, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer is not happy. She issued the following statement:
This is no way to treat the people of Arizona... To learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the Secretary of State is just outrageous. If our own government intends to sue our state to prevent illegal immigration enforcement, the least it can do is inform us before it informs the citizens of another nation.
But is the Obama administration really going to go through with it? A handful of conservatives think not:
- A Lawsuit Is Counter-intuitive, writes Ed Morrissey at Hot Air: "This may not surprise most people, given the Obama administration’s rhetorical attacks on the bill. However, those have slacked off recently as the Gulf oil spill finally began to get more of their attention than a law-enforcement measure in Arizona. The Deepwater Horizon disaster may not be the only reason for the White House distance from the controversy, either. The same Washington Post/ABC poll with the distorted sample noted last week shows solid support for the Arizona law."
- Hillary's Statement Doesn't Add Up, writes DRJ at Patterico's Pontifications: "Everyone is committed to comprehensive immigration reform if by 'everyone' Hillary Clinton means 34% of Americans, because that’s how many people agree with Obama’s views on immigration. And those resources and staffers Obama said he would send to Arizona? Sounds like they are more likely to be lawyers than security for the border."
- Liberal View: No Big Conspiracy Here, It's Just Politics Instead of contemplating whether or not the DOJ will go through with a suit, The Guardian's Michael Tomaskey focuses on why Clinton made the remarks and not holder: "I don't know that there's any big conspiracy behind it... Why Hillary and not Holder? There's no doubt that the issue affects our relations with Latin American countries, which have pretty uniformly denounced it. And sure, it's fair to speculate that politics is a factor here. Clinton is obviously extremely well-known among Latino voters, and Holder is not. And she is popular among them. And Obama has been losing support among Latinos in the last couple of months."
Update: An anonymous source tells CBS the Obama administration will challenge the law: "A senior administration official tells CBS News that the federal government will indeed formally challenge the law when Justice Department lawyers are finished building the case. The official said Justice is still working on building the case." However, the Justice Department insists "the question of whether to sue is still under consideration."