TeaPartyWire.com – Tea Party News by and for Tea Party Members

By: Yael T. Abouhalkah

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the health care law will further polarize the presidential and congressional elections.

Guess what: The tea party will be very, very upset about today’s action.

It will be louder than ever.

But will it be stronger and more influential than ever? That’s what we really don’t know right now.

Here’s what the Tea Party Express said today.

Here’s one reaction, asking for an investigation of Justice Elena Kagan.

And we’ll be seeing a lot more of this kind of defiance.

Thursday’s decision is going to give the tea party’s supporters a great chance to reach out to gain more allies to rally against the re-election of President Barack Obama.

We will see a lot of very mad people in the next few weeks and months, going around complaining about the court’s decision, complaining about Obama’s victory and demanding that Congress repeal the Affordable Care Act.

The tea party will ramp up its fundraising activities, railing against an “activist court.”

The tea party’s backers will declare that they simply must get more ultra-conservative men and women elected to Congress this fall.

The biggest goal will be taking over the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate.

But in light of the court’s decision, is there a possibility that all the furor over the issue will actually die down, as states and elected officials move on to the important work of serving the American people by putting the law in place?

Naive, huh?

By Sam Baker and Jonathan Easley
The Hill
06/25/12 10:40 AM ET

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday tossed out most of Arizona’s controversial immigration law.

The court upheld the most controversial part of the law, which allows law enforcement officials to verify a person’s legal status when they’re stopped on suspicion of committing a separate offense.

But the court sided with the Obama administration on three of the four specific challenges, and said the “show me your papers” section could be challenged again when it is implemented.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, reading the majority opinion from the bench, said the requirement could not be invalidated now because the state has not have a chance to implement it. There is therefore no clear evidence that it conflicts with federal law, Kennedy said.

Although detaining people solely to check their immigration status would “raise constitutional concerns,” he said, the requirement “could be read to avoid these concerns.”

Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor signed on to Kennedy’s decision.

Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito concurred in part and dissented in part.

Justice Elena Kagan recused herself from the case because she worked on immigration matters during her time as solicitor general.

The decision overall appears to be a victory for the Obama administration, which sued the Arizona Legislature over provisions of the Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act, known as SB 1070.

It argued that immigration law is foreign policy and therefore under federal, rather than state, jurisdiction.

Read more: The Hill