The Obama Administration has filed a lawsuit to throw out Arizona's law SB1070 which fights illegal immigration.
This lawsuit is quite extroardinary. Of course, all lawsuits are phrasd as if they are obviously right and there could not possibly be any argument. If you read the lawsuit, it sounds convincing at first... as they always do.
But the reality of this lawsuit is unprecedent and incredible.
Under the US Constitution, Federal laws are "the Supreme Law of the Land." That is true. Regulations issued by Federal agencies are also the "Supreme Law of the Land" to the extent that they are authorized by Federal law. Congress delegates power to essentially "make law" using the power of Congress.
However, the lawsuit (which you can see at the link by clicking on the headline above) makes an extraordinary new argument. The Obama lawsuit against Arizona tries to make POLICY into the "Supreme Law of the Land."
The lawsuit is based on the claim that Federal policy to not enforce the law can be Supreme over the States. That is unprecedent.
Federal law and Federal regulations are the supreme law of the land. A policy to not enforce the law is not the Supreme law fo the land. The Obama lawsuit seeks to blur the difference between Federal law and the bureaucrats' decision not to enforce the law. The Constitution makes Federal law enacted by Congress and signed by the President the Supreme Law of the land. It says nothing about decisions of bureaucrats or even officials to ignore the law. The discretion of Federal bureaucrats and officials not to enforce the law does not have any special status in the US Constitution.