×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: The judge has handed down the ruling in the Arizona immigration case. She has granted an injunction blocking parts of the Arizona law. They’re going to be some people that are surprised. I don’t know what specific parts of the law have been blocked, but we will find out, and we will have the details for you when we come back, maybe before we go to the break, but a judge has granted an injunction blocking parts of the Arizona law. This, to me, is big because normally federal courts do not side with the federal government against states like this. I could be wrong about this, but I don’t think that’s standard. This judge’s name is Susan Bolton. We heard going in, ‘Oh, she’s a great judge, you know, she’s not an ideologue, she’s not a partisan judge, she’s right down the middle, she was nominated by a Democrat, yeah, but she’s a right down the middle judge.’

We were set up for this.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The Associated Press, partisan political operatives, and the Democrats are just doing handstands. They are ecstatic. Susan Bolton, the judge, ‘has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona’s new immigration law from taking effect tomorrow, which is a major victory to opponents of the crackdown. The law is still gonna take effect but without many of the provisions that angered the opponents, including sections that require officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.’ The cops cannot do that now. Why not? Now, this is just until the courts resolve the issues. This is a temporary injunction, pending a trial to have final adjudication on this. But this is just flat-out amazing. Who is going to enforce immigration law if the Feds are not going to do it?

I mean, there are states that already do this, cops that already determine this. What about raids in states that are hiring illegals and they’re found and they’re deported? ‘Yeah, Rush, but those are federal agents doing that.’ No, not entirely. Local police in Rhode Island are enforcing federal immigration law, but now a judge has said that that cannot happen in Arizona, pending the results of a trial. By the way, if this gets all the way to the appellate court that’s the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals that will decide this, which is to say they will uphold her. So if this ends up as far as they go there’s going to be a trial with this and be after that then it will get to the Ninth Circus. So local cops will no longer be able to go after kidnappers. I mean, that’s a federal offense. This is absurd. This is patently absurd, and I’m going to tell you something.

All of you Democrats, all you liberals, you think you’ve won something here. This is just gonna add to your defeat, the size of your defeat come November. You know, there are very few pollsters that are going to be very honest about this. Michael Barone has a piece out today. It is looking like a disaster for the Democrats, and they know it, and there are two Democrat pollsters who still count as Americans first: Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen. They have a story in the Wall Street Journal today about the divisiveness of President Obama and his regime. So you think you’ve got a big win here in your voter registration drive called amnesty. Dingy Harry, Pelosi, Obama, they’re going to celebrate this. ‘Oh, yeah! Now we can register these people to vote. Nobody can stop ’em from voting.’ Just wait ’til November. That’s when the statement about all this will be made, the first of many. It’s time to deport Washington. As long as we’re talking about deporting people, it’s time to deport a town.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Audra in Boerne, Texas. You’re next on the EIB Network. Hi.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. How are you today?

RUSH: Very well, thank you.

CALLER: Great! I just wanted to say I am sad and furious all at the same time that this law in Arizona is not going to stick. We were really hoping here in Texas that it would come here, that we would be able to do the same thing and have it help us. I have a child that’s special needs in our schools, and we are cutting services right and left for him, and at the same time we’re expanding our dual-language, English as a Second Language classes.

RUSH: Yeah. I know.

CALLER: For parents that most of them aren’t even citizens and we’re not allowed to ask if they’re citizens.

RUSH: I’ll tell you what’s fascinating about this is. I wonder if this Arizona judge has said anything about having to produce your proof of health insurance. Who’s gonna enforce that? ‘Rush, that’s federal agents. IRS agents.’ Okay, so that’s permissible. The IRS is going to go out there and demand proof that you have health insurance on your tax return, but we can’t have local or state police determining immigration status in Arizona. It happens in every other state. It happens in Rhode Island. And she’s right: A lot of states were looking to take up the Arizona law. Look, folks, if you’re mad, if you’re angry, I’m with you, and I understand totally why. It goes beyond the concept of fairness and unfairness. This is simple right and wrong, and here is another classic illustration of how the left gets what it wants, outside of elections.

The elected representatives of the people of Arizona spoke, they enacted a law, and here comes a judge who can simply wipe it out. Now, the Department of Justice’s suit says the federal government can’t enforce the law because they don’t have the resources. That’s part of what the federal government argued. ‘We don’t have the resources. We can’t enforce the law because we don’t have the resources. We’re allocating our resources elsewhere but we don’t have the resources to man the border.’ Obama has said so. A bunch of Democrats have said so. In fact, Janet Napolitano said, ‘The border’s too big. We — we — we just can’t.’ The Arizona law would simply help supplement Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE. The Arizona law would help supply the resources. The Arizona law mirrors the federal law.

The Arizona law does not usurp it. Now, you and I, we are members of the country class. We’re just average yokels here. We’re merit-based, we have street smarts and common sense, and we’re looking at this and it doesn’t make any sense to us. We got a big problem, the elected representatives of Arizona finally said, ‘All right, we’re gonna do what the federal government won’t.’ The federal government says in its suit, ‘We can’t. We don’t have the resources.’ So Arizona says, ‘Okay, fine. We’ll help you out. We have a law that mirrors yours and we’re going to help you enforce it,’ and a judge comes along and says, ‘No, no, no! We’re going to stay that. I’m going to injunct that, pending a trial.’ So now nobody in Arizona is gonna determine whether somebody’s there legally or not, ’cause the Feds are not doing it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The judge is a Clinton appointee, Susan Bolton, and I remember, after it was reported or learned that she was a Clinton appointee, I remember everybody said, ‘Ah, but this woman, she’s not a political judge. She’s really not a partisan judge. She’s a fair judge.’ Oh, yeah, right. Right, right, right, right. It sounds to me like — and, you know, I’ve just had a chance here to cursorily read a fake media dispatch from the partisan political operatives at the AP and some crawls on Fox News and some of the other cable channels. But it sounds to me like that the judge, Susan Bolton, has simply adopted the ACLU’s argument that said that the law’s requirement that law enforcement check on people’s immigration status set a mandatory policy that goes beyond what the federal government requires and would burden the federal agency that responds to all this.

That was the ACLU’s claim. ‘Look, you’re gonna burden ICE! You’re gonna burden the immigration people with this. This goes way beyond what the Feds would even do. They’re not capable of dealing with it.’ The Feds came back and said, ‘Yeah, we don’t have the resources to handle this,’ and the Arizona people said, ‘Well, we’ll help you. I mean, we got a mirror image of your law here.’ So you could say that we’re going to stop enforcing the drug laws. They burdening the legal system. The ACLU’s point was, ‘How many potential millions of illegals do you have in Arizona? We’re going to burden the system.’ Joe Arpaio said, ‘I’ll build tents. We can handle it.’ There are millions of Americans out of work here and Obama can’t wait to hire more government workers. Why not go out and hire more ICE workers? If you say that you don’t have the resources, and the ACLU was right in there saying, ‘This is going to be a burden,’ and you got a Clinton-appointed judge here about whom we were told, ‘Yeah, but that doesn’t count, Limbaugh. She’s a nonpartisan. She’s a fair judge out there.’ At some point, folks, this is going to be overturned, and it’s gonna become settled law. Even if it goes to the Ninth Circus, this is going to be overturned at some point. If it goes to SCOTUS, it will be.

Dillon, South Carolina. Welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program. Great to have you here.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. I wish Jan Brewer would just call their bluff and Susan Bolton’s bluff and just, you know, maybe we could have her arrested for treason for failure to uphold the oath of office that she took as a judge. I mean, I am so sick of all of this. Why can’t 70% of Arizona people who support this law just take out an arrest warrant for her arrest?

RUSH: Welcome to the ruling class versus the country class.

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Classic example. ‘That 70% doesn’t know what’s good for it. That 70%, that’s a mob. We can’t let that 70% have its way. We, the 20 to 30%, we’re running this show and we’re going to make sure that the 70% do not rule the day here.’ This is a great illustration of that.

CALLER: Well, what are our options? I mean, we’re going to have to do something. I don’t know. At this point the way they play the game, are we going to have them create crisis before November? Are they gonna cut off the elections?

RUSH: See, this is the frightening question: What are the options. The remedial sources don’t seem to be working. The legislature, the elected representatives of the state passing laws, is overturned by federal judges. What do we do? More and more people are asking this. We don’t want to wait ’til November, is what she means. You know, I say, ‘You wait ’til November, folks. You’re going to see the first statement,’ and people out there say, ‘To hell with November, what can we do now?’ and with each ruling like this or each new development like this, that passion multiplies. ‘What can we do now?’ You heard what she said. Did you hear what she said at the beginning? ‘Just enforce the law anyway! Just go ahead and enforce it. Screw the judge.’ Just go ahead and do it. We got another call, same thing. This is Patrick in Indianapolis. Welcome to the program, sir. Hello.

CALLER: Hello, sir. It’s truly an honor to speak with you. I’ve listened to you for many years. I’m a member of the United States military, so I won’t give any more detail than that in case of repercussions. However, sir, I agree with her point. Call their bluff, force a constitutional crisis. It’s like a chess game, it’s like a strategy in the military. You sit there, call their bluff, make them find the governor in contempt of their ruling and force that constitutional issue and crisis onto the plate.

RUSH: This is —

CALLER: The other states will fall in line, I think, that are actually looking at possibly supporting this law.

RUSH: See, this is the question to a lot of people. We’re ignoring the rule of law. To a lot of people, the law is being trampled on. So they say, what is our recourse? What’s the recourse to lawlessness? Is it more lawlessness?

CALLER: No.

RUSH: We just say, ‘Screw you! You say the law is not going to go into effect but I, the governor of Arizona, am going to go ahead and implement it anyway,’ and you force a confrontation.

CALLER: Rush —

RUSH: Even if this goes to the Supreme Court, Patrick, the Supreme Court’s not in session, and they’re not back until October. By the time this thing would reach the Supreme Court Obama’s going to have amnesty. He’s going to have all these brand-new Democrat voters.

CALLER: Yes, but —

RUSH: So what do people do?

CALLER: I’m sure, sir. But by forcing the issue now, it puts it up into the press and it forces the issue to be on until the court gets back into session, which is in line with the electoral time frame. By enforcing the federal law through the state right now, you don’t have those voters getting on board therefore and you keep it into the media as the headline the whole time. It’s definitely going to, like you stated earlier, backfire on the Democrats so much so that you will see other states potentially that were on the fence in supporting this actually come forward and support it and be in coalition with Arizona.

RUSH: Yeah, I understand the theory. I understand the theory, and what you, Patrick, and the woman previous to you said is you’re basically paraphrasing Andrew Jackson who said to John Marshall, ‘Okay, you’ve made your decision. Now you enforce it.’ This is not the first time something like this has happened in the country. So essentially what you all on the phones, you, too — and any of the rest of you in the audience who are saying, ‘Screw it, go ahead and implement the law in the first place!’ What you’re basically saying is, ‘Okay, judge, here’s your ruling, you enforce it. You don’t have the resources to control illegal immigration. Do you have the resources to kick us in jail, American citizens, for trying to enforce your law that you won’t?’

So, ‘Okay, judge, you’ve ruled that the cops cannot determine somebody’s illegality. We’re gonna say the companies, ‘You do it, you enforce your law.” That’s happened. Andrew Jackson said it to John Marshall, ‘Okay, you enforce it.’ (interruption) Well, I know. It is dangerous. But the point is this has been building. This is not the first example. Prop 187, same thing happened. In California — in California! — a majority of voters via Prop 187 said, ‘We’re no longer going to pay welfare, education, health care, all of that to illegal immigrants.’ A judge, a federal judge said, ‘Nope, you can’t do that. It’s unconstitutional. That ballot initiative is unconstitutional.’ This kind of thing has just been building. Now, I don’t know what is going to happen, but you know Joe Arpaio and Jan Brewer (Arpaio the sheriff of Maricopa County and Jan Brewer, the governor out there) are not wallflowers.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Well, I have to check into that. I’ve been trying to do a whole bunch of stuff here while hosting the program at the same time. But I think you’re right. I think the judge has also blocked the part of the rule that says illegals have to carry documentation. Now, I need to find that at the top of the hour when I have some time to look into it, but there is that report. We have to carry documentation. We have to carry our driver’s licenses. We have to prove who we are when we go in the bank. We have to prove who we are to buy an airline ticket. They don’t. Apparently the judge has made Arizona a sanctuary state, not a sanctuary city. So we shall see.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, I don’t want to get distracted from the Arizona case. It’s not complicated. The judge here, the Clinton appointee, did adopt the ACLU argument, which is the argument the government made as well, that Arizona’s creating its own enforcement mechanism that runs contrary to the federal government, and she says that you can’t have a law that’s legal that’s preemptive. So the Arizona law, she says, would be preemptive. Now, that’s a flat-out deception, and everybody knows it’s a deception. More than that, you have a very high bar to stay a law, to stop a law enacted legally by the elected representatives of the people of the state. Any law, you have to have a very high bar before conducting a trial, and that bar was not met. But she ruled as she did anyway which means that this is an activist decision, this is not a judicial decision, and you all know it, you instinctively know this.

The judge, in order to rule as she did, had to ignore what Arizona was actually doing and instead she had to accept the spin of the government and the ACLU and the fake media, which is that there’s profiling going on. That is a manufactured lie. Nothing, nothing in the media is real. There is nothing real. Media is not real. Liberalism is not real. It’s all spin; it’s all fake; it’s all lies. There is no racial profiling, and yet this judge has ruled on the spin. This judge has not ruled on the law. There is no racial profiling. We didn’t make a big deal of it because we figure a judge is gonna look at the law, not the stupid media in making her decision. But she listened to the media. She had to ignore the high bar that was not met in staying the law. This underscores why Sonia Sotomayor should not be on the Supreme Court. This underscores why Elena Kagan should not be on the Supreme Court, because they are activists. They have no judicial temperament, judicial experience, they’re not judges. Well, Sotomayor pretended to be one on TV, I guess, but she’s not.

So we now have a situation where the federal government, through the executive branch and this court, is saying that state and local law enforcement is essentially barred from inquiring into the legal status of individuals who are stopped incidental to other potential violations. That’s the net effect. You run a red light, you rob a convenience store, you cannot be asked for your papers, you cannot be asked about your identity. And this, I believe, will seal the fate of the Democrats in November. Now, this is the basics of this. You have an activist decision, not a judicial decision, and every time they do something like this they are sealing their fate in even greater numbers once we get to November. Stop and think about this angle. Muslim terrorists are going to have a field day in Arizona. You cannot ask them where they’re from. Cannot even act like we know where they’re from. Cannot ask them for their papers. We can ask you for yours. Not them.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let me encapsulate this for you. Very simple. As far as the Arizona law is concerned, it is no longer illegal to be illegal. No longer illegal to be illegal, but it is illegal to ask somebody about their status. No longer illegal to be illegal. Thank you, Judge Bolton.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I know this is just a stay. The Arizona ruling is just a stay, and there’s not a final ruling yet. There will be a trial on this. But if you assume this law gets struck down, will the local authorities be able to ask for proof of citizenship when people register to vote? ‘Cause right now, it has been blocked, the provision requiring aliens to carry immigration papers has been blocked. The illegals do not have to carry documentation. In other words, it’s no longer illegal to be illegal in the state of Arizona, as of this ruling. Folks, it’s going to have even more angst and upset people in November when this all shakes out because once again, we have here an activist decision, not a judicial decision. We have a judge who has ignored the law and who has ruled on the spin. She’s ruled on the spin from the ACLU; she has ruled on the spin from the fake media, from the partisan political operatives in the media.

Wall Street Journal reports: ‘U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton agreed to enjoin several provisions, including one that required police officers to check the immigration status of a person stopped for an alleged other violation, such as speeding, if reasonable suspicion existed that the individual was illegally in the U.S. … The judge also enjoined sections that required immigrants to carry papers proving their right to live in the U.S. at all times and another that banned undocumented workers from congregating in public places, such as street corners or outside stores, to solicit employment.’ The PDF of this ruling is 36 pages and there’s no way that I’m going to be able to go through all 36 pages prior to the program ending, but I know what went on here. I’ve summarized this as well as anybody else will. And really, brevity is the soul of wit. The fewest words it takes to make the point, the more powerful the point. It’s no longer illegal to be illegal in Arizona. But you’re going to have to show your ID if you’re in Arizona for any reason: to show up to vote, cash a check, use a credit card or whatever, you are going to have to show ID. You have to prove that you are who you are.

The people in the state of Arizona illegally are not going to have to prove it in Arizona. The federal government essentially said, ‘We don’t have the resources to enforce the law. We’re too busy doing other things.’ Arizona said essentially, ‘We’ll help you. We got a mirror image of your law anyway.’ So the ACLU argument has been adopted, the argument of the government, that Arizona is creating its own enforcement mechanism that runs contrary to the federal government’s enforcement mechanism, and that, of course, is a-flat-out deception, everybody knows it. This is a high bar to stay a law, a very high bar, and this judge did not meet the bar. You have a Clinton appointee — I keep going back to this — I’m still struck by the fact that everybody told us, ‘Yeah, yeah, she’s a Clinton appointee but she’s not political.’ (laughing) A Clinton appointee but she’s not political.

Now, this is from her ruling: ”The court by no means disregards Arizona’s interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money,’ the ruling said. ‘Even though Arizona’s interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws.” Meaning it’s not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce federal law. Meaning the state can’t preempt the Feds. And Arizona said, ‘We’re not preempting. We’ve got a mirror image law here.’ But she’s bought the notion there was racial profiling and discrimination and all this happy horse manure that’s part of the American left these days. So that’s pretty much it. I guess the judge is saying it’s not in the public interest for Arizona to try to defend itself from an invasion. I don’t know how you look at this with any sort of common sense and come to the ruling this woman came to. But, she didn’t. She’s a leftist and she made an activist decision, not a judicial decision.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Randy in Dallas, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello, sir.

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. You had a caller on earlier who was wondering what we can do in the interim before October comes, ’cause, quite frankly, this thing gonna is going to go right through the Ninth Circuit. It’s going to have to go to SCOTUS. But what we can do in the interim is we can join the Minutemen. Anybody that can make it up to Arizona — that can guard our borders, that can do whatever they can do — go for it, and that’s what I’m planning to do if I can put it together.

RUSH: Well, now, what makes you think you’re going to do was going to be legal when law enforcement officials in Arizona cannot do what the law says was gonna permit ’em to do?

CALLER: Well, I don’t know, Rush. But if they ask me for my driver’s license when I’m out there, I’m going to ask you: ‘What should I do?’

RUSH: Okay, very simple. Great question. If you are asked in Arizona or anywhere else — anywhere, Randy. If somebody asks you for your driver’s license or any other identification, just look at ’em and say, ‘No hablo ingles.’

CALLER: Good answer.

RUSH: That’s all you do. Just tell ’em you can’t speak English, use Spanish ‘No hablo ingles,’ and you’re free and clear. Simple.

CALLER: I encourage anybody that can do something along these lines. It probably needs to happen.

RUSH: Well, I encourage everybody: Next time you’re asked for ID just tell ’em, ‘No hablo ingles,’ and see what happens.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This