All Episodes
Previous Next
May 21, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:30
May 21, 2010, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi.
You know who I am.
Don't doubt me.
You know what this is.
So let's talk live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
And this is one of the greatest risks ever taken by a major media figure.
And that is turning over the all-important content portion of the program to rank amateur callers.
Lovable.
But rank amateur callers.
By definition, a caller cannot be a highly trained broadcast specialist, which is what I am.
One day of the week, we go to the phones.
You can talk about anything, whether it bores me, whether I couldn't care less about it, doesn't matter.
Here's the telephone number to call 800 28282, and if you want to send the email address, L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
Obama criticizing the Arizona immigration law, bringing in Senor Winsis, Felipe Colleron from Mexico to act as a as a ventroloquist puppet to mouth the identical criticisms of the Arizona law.
Getting a standing ovation from the Democrats in the House of Representatives as Senor Wentz spoke to a joint session of Congress.
The president has constantly criticized the Arizona law, and he's now he's asking our so-called allies and friends to do it.
He has not once spoken to the governor of Arizona Jan Brewer.
Not once.
And yet Obama tells us, and she's tried.
She has, as the saying goes, she has reached out.
She has reached out to various members of the Obama administration.
She reached out to the former governor, Big Sis, Janet Napolitano.
She can't get a call back.
Nobody in the administration will talk to the governor of Arizona.
And yet Obama tells us he has an open mind that we must listen to opposing views.
He told some graduates somewhere, maybe it was Ann Arbor.
If you um listen to Rush Lynn Bump, well, try reading the Hut McPhole.
Yeah, and you listen to Glenn Beck?
Why?
Try reading Time Magazine.
Well he will not open his mind to any contravailing opinion.
He doesn't reach out, as he asks us to do, he doesn't listen to the other side.
Speaking of Arizona, you know, I've Senior Wentz is up there and is criticizing our core values, criticizing state of Arizona, mischaracterizing our law, worrying about profiling, racial profiling, and discrimination.
Shouldn't the Congress out of respect for Mr. Calderon's superior morality immediately adopt Mexico's laws on illegal aliens word for word because he came here to criticize ours?
Senor Winces comes here to criticize ours, should we not, as a show of respect and acknowledge his moral superiority on this, adopt Mexico's laws on immigration.
And by the way, the cities that are boycotting Arizona will you boycott Mexico?
Mayor Antonio Villaragosa, Mayor Gavin Newsom, San Francisco, you are actively urging boycotts of city officials and any kind of activity, economic activity from occurring in Arizona.
You're prohibiting city employees from San Francisco to Los Angeles from going to Arizona.
Well, Mexico has draconian immigration laws, and you talk about mistreating illegal aliens, you go down, you try to be an illegal immigrant in Mexico and see what happens to you.
Shouldn't Mayor Villaragoza and shouldn't Mayor Newsom and all these other Nambi Pambi Leftists jumping on the boycott Arizona bandwagon.
Shouldn't they also not boycott Arizona?
Or Mexico, rather, because Mexico is far more draconian.
Mexico far, far more egregious in human rights violations.
Will Mayor Villaragosa cancel sister city relationship with Mexican towns.
So many of them currently enjoy Los Angeles.
One of Los Angeles sister cities is Mexico City.
Now, of course, all these questions are just facetious, folks, but the bottom line is Mexico is far more draconian.
They mistreat illegal aliens free.
We don't even we don't even hold a candle.
They're boycotting the wrong place.
Now we go to the audio sound bites, the governor of Arizona responding to Senor Wences.
She was on last night with uh Greta Van Sustrad on a Fox News channel.
Van Susterin said, We had a visitor on Capitol Hill today.
Senor Wences of Mexico was here.
He had words before the Congress.
He said this about your new statute in Arizona.
He said that he strongly disagrees with the recently adopted law in Arizona.
It's a law that not only ignores the reality that cannot be erased by decree, but also it's a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement.
What do you say to that?
This is Jan Brewer, the governor of Arizona.
I think that's really unfortunate.
I don't believe he understands what the law actually says.
You know, I don't mean that derogatory, but the fact of the matter is that it prohibits uh racial profiling as illegal in the state of Arizona, and racial profiling is illegal in the United States.
Governor Brewer, it doesn't matter what he understands.
Doesn't matter if he understands it or not.
He was given orders to go out and mouth the words of the regime.
That's the price he had to pay for having a state dinner in his honor.
Doesn't understand it or doesn't matter.
It was not Senor Wences speaking.
It was Senor Wences speaking the words of Barack Obama to try to add impact to put more pressure on you, Governor Brewer.
Van Sustran says, well, yesterday, President Obama speaking with uh President Senor Wences, said that he didn't say that the statute called for racial profiling, but he described it as having the potential for that probability.
He refers to it as misguided.
What do you say to the president of the regime?
I just keep questioning the fact of the continuation of misleading, I believe, the American public on the facts.
It's very clear, it's been in federal law for decades, and it's something that we implemented in here to use as another tool to get our borders secured.
And if it was illegal or it was racial profiling here in the state of Arizona, it would have been illegal and racial profiling decades ago for the United States.
So she's being generous.
She's being overly kind to Obama.
She doesn't say that he doesn't understand it.
She says he's misleading people, which is exactly right.
Well, the truth is he's lying about it.
She's been trying to get hold of him.
She's been trying to get hold of anybody in Washington to listen to her.
Van Susterin said, Governor, what are you what do you need?
You need help?
Is there anything we can do for you?
We are out here on the battlefield getting the impact of all this illegal immigration and all the crime uh that comes with it.
And uh no one, we have uh I have repeatedly uh sent letters uh to the administration and to the president of the United States with absolutely no response.
And I just can't understand for the life of me when 70% of the American public uh agrees uh with Arizona uh that uh no one is uh taking any action, no one is calling us.
We have borders for a reason.
A nation without borders is like a house without walls.
It collapses.
We need help, Mr. President.
And her plea falls on deaf ears.
Byron York Washington examined her today when President Obama discussed the new Arizona immigration law with Mexican President Senor Wensis at the White House on Wednesday, he was doing something he has never done with the governor of Arizona.
Although Obama has repeatedly criticized the law, he has not Once talked about it with Governor Brewer, nor is any such discussion in the works.
If they did talk, Brewer might ask Obama why he took a foreign leader's side against a United States state on the issue of illegal immigration in a Rose Garden appearance.
Called the Arizona law discriminatory, said that it will lead to immigrants being treated as criminals.
Obama echoed Senor Wences' remarks, saying the Arizona law has the potential of being applied in a discriminatory fashion and creates the possibility that immigrants will be harassed or arrested.
The scene left some in Arizona and all around the country slackjawed.
It is unfortunate and disappointing, said Arizona Republican Senator Ju McCain, that the President of Mexico chose to criticize the state of Arizona by weighing in on a U.S. domestic policy issue during a trip that was meant to reaffirm the unique relationship between our two countries.
So it's all over the place.
I mean, everybody sees what's happening here.
We all know what's happening.
It's never happened before.
The events of this week are unprecedented.
Now we have had Senator Kennedy travel to the Soviet Union, and we have had Senator Kennedy send emails or notes to the Soviet Union leaders saying warning them of doing business with Reagan.
And we have had George Miller and a number of other Democrats in Congress go down and chastise Daniel Ortega for embarrassing them by having a public relationship with the Soviet Union during the Iran Contra Wars.
But never and in one week to vote have we had representatives of China and Mexico come to the United States, criticize our country, and the administration agree with them.
It's never happened.
We'll be right back.
Oh, yes, I have.
Topo Jijo was at the White House yesterday.
You see that little mouse, that little rat that ran across the steps?
Obama's up there at the podium and some rodent goes by.
Topo Jijo.
Senor Wensis.
Greetings and welcome back, Rush Limbaugh.
For those of you uh too young to know, those are staple characters and guests on the old Ed Sullivan show on Sunday nights on CBS.
Let me read to you from the Arizona law.
The Arizona law says, quote, a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, or town, or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color, or national origin.
Meaning there's no racial profiling.
So this means that an illegal alien arrested in Arizona.
If that illegal alien could prove he was arrested because of racial profiling, he would hit the lottery.
He would hit the jackpot because the law specifically says you can't racially profile.
Have we ever had so much dishonesty, blatant dishonesty from the White House in the history of this country?
I mean, even Clinton backed down when they found the blue dress.
The Arizona law is the equivalent of the blue dress.
And Obama's not backing down.
It's still racial profiling.
And he's got Senor Wences coming up from Mexico to say the same thing.
The White House have a fence around it.
Why?
Why does the White House have a uh has a fence around it to keep people out?
It also has a bunch of secret service people guarding the fence.
And they have guns.
Loaded guns.
You try to smuggle some drugs over the White House fence.
You try to just go through the White House or over it yourself and see what happens to you.
And when you go to the White House, everybody needs papers.
Every time I've been, I don't care.
Every new time I have to submit, resubmit social security number, and all kinds of other information.
Every time they don't keep it on, well, they may keep it on file.
You still have to present it each and every time.
You have to present your papers.
All right, to the phones we go to Bill in uh Southern West Virginia.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hello.
Uh what I wanted to talk about was why the Democrats were marginally successful last weekend.
And I think they were trying to do a game changer.
They were trying to put as much resources in as few races as possible.
Just so they can say, hey, we won.
It'd be really interesting just to know how many union hours were spent in Arkansas and Pennsylvania, especially the congressional election.
Just up for your thoughts.
You know.
But it really looked like the unions and the Democratic operatives were really.
Let me tell you my thoughts on this since you uh since you asked.
Uh nothing prohibits me from offering an opinion on Open Line Friday either.
Um it's typically caller would call one to know what I think on Open Line Friday, everybody does.
Um I think that you're right uh that they've focused on two or three places with a lot of effort, a lot of union people in Pennsylvania 12 residents there.
Saw a story today that the uh the unions plan on spending a hundred million dollars nationwide on Democrat congressional races in November during the campaigns.
But I want to focus on on Pennsylvania twelve, because there appears to be a growing body of thought uh on our side that, including Newt Gingrich, uh uh uh uh Newt Gingrich, you know, I'm gonna have to revise downward uh my predictions on Republican strength in November.
If we uh we couldn't uh take advantage of all this to beat uh this guy at Pennsylvania 12, I don't have trouble.
Paul Jigot, the Wall Street Journal, same thing.
Um really bashing the Republicans for being lackadaisical, taking too much for granted, thinking it's gonna be a sweep, they just gotta get out of the way and say we're not Democrats and so forth, and they're looking at Pennsylvania 12, and they're saying, you know what, I I and by the way, I have no brief for the Republicans here.
Don't don't misunderstand.
I am if you want if you wanted to call here and tell me the Republicans are a bunch of uh incompetent cowards right now, I wouldn't, you wouldn't get an argument from me.
But the Republicans being cowardly or what have you had nothing to do with what happened in Pennsylvania 12.
What I want to know is, when did the new test for our strength in November when did our new test become being able to win in two to one Democrat to Republican districts?
When's that start?
My friends, the dirty little secret is we don't have to win two to one Democrat districts in order to gain control of the House.
I also want to know what we are supposed to do when the Democrat candidate in a Democrat two to one district runs against Obama.
And does so more effectively than our guy does.
I want to know, the guy that did this, Mr. Critz, had a relationship, an association with Mirtha, who, whether you like it or not, was very popular there.
He brought home a lot of bacon.
This guy, Mr. Kritz, ran against health care.
He ran against cap and trade.
Uh he he ran uh a number of things.
The only thing he said he was going to do was bring home the bacon.
Now, I look at things from a conservative versus liberal point of view, not so much Republican versus Democrat.
I know a lot of people do otherwise.
The people analyzing this are not obviously looking at it as conservatism versus liberalism.
They're looking at it at Republican versus Democrat, and they say Republican lost.
Well, what does it tell us?
And I'm asking you.
What does it tell us when we lose to a Democrat who sounds more like me than the Republican does.
And the Republican wasn't bad.
I mean, it wasn't, he wasn't a he was an incompetent candidate.
What had to happen there, and what obviously didn't happen is that the Republican candidate did not say what was going on.
He said, Don't believe Mr. Kritz, Mr. Kritz is not telling you who he really is.
Mr. Kritz is not going to vote against Obama if he's elected to this seat.
He's going to be voting with Obama.
He's going to be voting with Pelosi.
Now maybe that's what everybody's upset about, that the Republicans didn't have the the gonads or the t the intelligence to make that part of the campaign.
But I really don't think we're falling off the cliff.
I don't think the the end of the day is near when a Democrat wins election sounding like me.
Now at the end of the day, a Democrat won, and the Democrat is not going to vote like I would vote, and he's not going to oppose Obama.
So he lied to his constituents.
Apparently we didn't call him on the lie.
But this was not a test of the Obama agenda versus the anti-Obama agenda.
That test was not on the ballot in Pennsylvania 12.
And our doomsayers are going to have to change their perspective on this a little bit.
Because they're missing the boat.
I'll explain again when we come back.
No need, no need for you to think about it.
I do that for you.
One of the many bonus services accompanying a listenership here at the Limbaugh Institute.
Welcome back.
Well, this Pennsylvania 12 is the more I think about it, it is crucially important for you to understand what's going on.
I have a I have a foreboding here.
So many in the media on our side are to abandon the whole notion that we could have a big November off of this one race.
Now, I know that there are very few Republicans who are as oriented toward being on offense as I am.
And perhaps if I if my business was to be elected as a Republican, I'd be running scared too.
But that's not my business.
But I just can't, I can't imagine myself running scared, period.
It's not my nature.
So in the days leading up to the election on Tuesday, we were having essentially a party.
Everybody on our side, it's gonna be big, it's gonna be the polling date of Pennsylvania 12, it's very neck and neck.
Uh, and uh November is just looming and Obama keeps screwing up, and the poll numbers keep uh plunging for Obama, then this one race comes and so many people sort of, oh, I'm gonna revise downward my purchase.
I don't think we can win the House if we can't win this race.
I'm asking myself, did these people pay any attention to this race?
This is important, so let me walk you through this again.
The Democrat candidate, the former Murpha associate, there's a guy named Kritz.
He tried to out conservative the Republican.
Tim Burns.
He succeeded in out-conservating Tim Burns.
He even accused Tim Burns of not wanting to cut taxes enough.
The Democrat accused Burns of not wanting to cut taxes enough.
It's mind-boggling here.
The vote proved one thing to the Democrats, and that is the power of unions, which means that they are simply going to kowtow to him even more if that's possible.
Now, the union spending in this district and throughout the the races just shows why it's so important to get around uh this recent Supreme Court ruling which allows corporations to donate to candidates.
And of course, Obama's proposed legislation wants to roll that back.
Now, the Democrat in in Pennsylvania 12 had to run as a conservative in a district that is two to one Democrat.
It should tell us all we need to know about November.
Let's put it this way.
If you look at this district, Pennsylvania 12.
Mertha voted for the Obama agenda.
He voted for every single item in the Obama agenda.
His replacement, Mr. Kritz said he would vote against it all.
Opposed health care, opposed cap and trade, but he said he would bring home the bacon.
That's all the people of that district care about.
That area is dependent on the federal government for its existence.
The left has those people right where they want them.
But I am now now, this guy obviously was lying through his teeth.
This guy's going to get to Washington if he wins this.
Well, he did win.
He's going to he have to run again and then uh in in November.
This is a special election.
But he's going to vote for Obama.
He's going to vote for everything on the Obama agenda.
He's going to vote right along with Pelosi.
He's not, he's not going to become a dyno, a Democrat in name only.
If this guy were genuine, we'd have to have a new term for these kinds of people.
A red dog Democrat.
Not blue dog Democrat.
But for all of you who are worried about this race, and for all of you in the media on our side worried about this race, please understand the Obama agenda wasn't on the ballot.
The Democrat Party agenda wasn't on the ballot.
The Pelosi and Reed agenda was not part of the campaign.
The Democrat ran to the right of Tim Burns.
He out conservatived the conservative candidate in a district that depends on the federal government for its existence.
It's a two-to-one Democrat district.
Where is it written that the only way we can take back the House is winning in two to one Democrat districts where the Democrat candidate sounds like me?
My point is this: You Democrats run on Obama's agenda, run on the Pelosi agenda.
You run on it.
You run on high taxes.
You run on 10% unemployment.
You run on the results of the first year and a half of this presidency.
You run on the Arizona immigration law.
You run on open borders.
You run on wanting amnesty for early.
You run on that, and let's see what happens in even a two-to-one Democrat district.
But for the life of me, folks, I don't understand why the people on our side are turning tail and running here and predicting doom now.
When the people in Pennsylvania 12 didn't even vote on the Obama agenda.
You'd have to say by analyzing the results that the people that voted in that election voted against the Obama agenda.
Therefore, how can that be bad?
Well, it's bad if you look at it Republican versus Democrat.
If you look at it as conservative versus liberal, you might have a different attitude about it.
Back to the phones.
This is Roland El Paso, Texas.
Great to have you on the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Well, thank you for taking my call today, Rush.
Uh megaditto.
This is a real who having a chance to talk to him.
Thank you very much, sir.
You know, Rush, earlier this week you commented on Anti Obama's deportation hearing.
In Zatuty, yes.
And while you were making your comments, my thoughts wandered in a different direction than the point you made at the time.
Rush, it's no it was no surprise that a relative of a sitting president would be granted asylum.
I would expect no less.
The interesting part is that it shows that illegals living in this country can get public housing and no doubt food stamps and free health care.
Yeah.
There's a much bigger issue than Annie Obama to be found in between the lines of the news story.
How many other illegals in this country are living off the American taxpayers?
And does Donnie Obama now owe the American people the money received while here illegally?
Oh, fat chance.
What is your answer?
What do you think?
I mean, uh, it's it's gotta be a lot.
Well, I would ask that uh there be an accounting.
You know, there's uh there's a lot of money being spent in this country.
And the American people deserve a better accounting of how that money is being spent and who it's being spent on.
Now, there's there's no problem with coming here illegally, and although I don't agree with subsidizing that effort for those that want to come to America.
Be that as it may, but being here illegal in this country and being subsidized.
That's that's beyond the pale.
Yeah, of course, of course it is.
Uh, but you you you want an accounting.
We're beyond that.
I guess my point, we're we're beyond an accounting.
We don't need an accounting to know that we're getting screwed.
We don't need an accounting to know we are getting the shaft.
We don't have any money.
We don't need an accounting.
Uh and an accounting is never gonna happen.
I'd like an accounting of a stimulus bill, frankly.
I'd like an accounting of TARP.
I would like somebody to tell me where the Federal Reserve loaned two trillion dollars before we got the TARP.
I'd like for somebody to account for me how many people who aren't working in this country we are subsidizing and to what level.
Of course we would all love that.
I would love an accounting of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
But we don't need it.
We don't need it to know that the wrong people are running the show.
We don't need it.
We know who they are, we know what their policies are, we know what the objective they have.
We have the accounting.
All that we need to know, and yes, it is this simple.
They're liberals.
That's all we need to know.
Everything descends from that.
Everything, every item of corruption, abuse of power, post-Americanism.
The answer to everything that's going on that you don't understand in this country can be answered 99% of the time with one word.
Liberalism.
Would you two stop playing kissy face in there?
We have a program to execute here.
We're gonna stick with the phones where we're going.
We're going to uh Ralph in South Jersey.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Yes, thank you for taking taking my call, Mr. Limbo.
Uh I want to say this, okay.
Uh the uh president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon has every right to weigh in about the uh the law in Arizona, because he represents a people and he represents a country, and as far as I uh I'm concerned, that is an interest uh to that country, Mexico, just as it is uh in uh this country.
Now, whether or not I agree with the comment he made, uh I can form my own opinion, and in my opinion, the uh the Arizona law is racist because uh the immigration issue never was and never has been about the uh the issue of immigration.
The whole premise of the immigration issue, Mr. Limbo about race.
You know, Ralphie.
Yes, sir.
I didn't challenge Senor Wentz's right to say what he wanted.
But but don't you find it appalling that a forum was given to the President of Mexico to come here and trash and lie about the United States and the Arizona immigration law?
Do you not find it strange that the president of the United States sides with the president of Mexico and every uh everybody else but the people of this country and the people of Arizona on this issue?
Uh well, yes, he has made that that comment was uh, you know, before uh President uh Calderon came to uh to this country and he sticks to that position.
And uh, you know, but that's about the uh the the question, Mr. Limbo of racial profiling, short of racial profiling, how is this law going to be enforced number one, number two they have not defined what is an illegal and who is an illegal.
So let me Ralph, let me let me read the Arizona law to you.
Are you are you listening here?
Yeah, yes, sir.
Here's here's what it says uh Ralph, quote, a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city or town or other political subdivision of the state may not consider race, color, or national origin.
Now would you explain to me, Ralph, where the racism isn't at?
Well, just because it's Well, you can't, Ralph, because there's no racism in it.
Don't even try, Ralph.
Well, it it it it doesn't mean it ain't so, Mr. Limbo.
Uh, you know, I definitely do not like to believe they can't enforce this law without uh resorting to they self-profiling.
I I really don't.
I mean, on maybe there are innocent people that are getting picked, uh, you know, on this.
Uh Ralph.
Yes.
They're not innocent people are not getting picked.
The why I mean the the are you telling me that legal immigrants are being deported?
Well, no, but they are being uh stopped.
They are being stopped.
No, they're the law hasn't even gone into effect yet, Ralph.
It doesn't matter.
I mean, you know, there are people there are people like uh how in the world did you think that this guy was not a kook.
Well, I agree with him enough.
And uh Are you do are you are you are you opposition?
Ralph, thanks much.
I'm sorry, Snerdley embarrassed you this way.
It's really not your fault here, uh, my friend.
Good Lord Snertley.
Uh the guy it's it's it's well, maybe the liberal mind, but I mean uh it it's fine to have opposition, but the guy was not right about one thing that he said, even confronted with the Arizona law said it doesn't matter.
And yet that's the sole reason he's calling.
Well, I'm all I'm saying is you said you didn't want any kooks, and yet you gave me one.
You gave me well.
I don't know if he's now stop that, H.R. Stop.
Everybody's telling me he's not a cook, he's an idiot.
He's not, he's a was a nice guy.
He was just he was just he was just malinformed, uninformed, ill informed, or what have you.
Uh I guess it was instructive in a way, because this is what we're up against.
This is the so-called mindset uh that that we're up against.
Uh Michelle in Fort Smith, Arkansas.
You're on open line Friday.
Hello.
Hi, Russ.
It's an honor to speak to you today.
My husband's gonna be so jealous.
He's listening to you right now, I know he is.
Um, poor Ralph, you know, I mean, he doesn't understand that if you're not an illegal you have a driver's license, a ballot driver's license.
But what I call for today is I just heard today that the head of uh immigration, John Morton, may not help Arizona deport their illegals.
And I'm utterly appalled by that.
I mean, these people took an oath.
This is true.
Uh you heard correctly.
The immigration uh the ICE guys have told Arizona they're not gonna take their referrals.
They're not gonna they're not gonna deal with their cases.
But then these people take an oath to uphold the laws of this country.
They're they said they're too busy or or some such thing.
And they're just this is the regime.
I mean, it's just orders of the regime to steer clear of this.
I also wanted to tell you on a side note that I both called and emailed Mark Pryor.
I'm not even bothering Blanche Lincoln because she's out anyway.
She can't she can't stay in.
But uh and I condemned his standing ovation to Felipe Calderon's speech yesterday and told him that he did not deserve to be my re uh to represent me in the Senate.
So I was And you know what he did when he got your message?
He probably deleted it.
And laughed at it first.
Yes, but uh, you know, I have to look at it.
Well, here's another one of my Rube Hick constituents, not smart enough to understand what's going on here in the joint session, and uh probably printed it out just so I can rip it up before he deleted it.
Well, you know, my husband's already, you know, told me several times that I've probably on a uh watch list for for him because um I emailed and called him so many times and chewed him out.
But I like I care.
You know, I really don't care what Mark First is.
Well, maybe, but you know, he never actually speaks to me personally.
He never actually because it doesn't matter what you think.
Don't you these are liberals?
It doesn't matter what you think.
They are governing precisely against your will.
On purpose, by design.
They hold You in contempt.
We'll be back.
The head of the immigrations and customs enforcement munch, ICE, his last name is Morton, and he was just on um Fox News and he said, I don't think the Arizona law or laws like it are the solution.
The best way to reduce illegal immigration is through a comprehensive federal approach.
Not a patchwork of state laws, so that's why ICE uh will not take referred cases from Arizona.
▲
Export Selection