Weasel-Wording the Constitution

The argument put forth by the Department of Justice against the state of Arizona's law SB1070 appears to be based on an erroneous or intentional misquote of a constitutional requirement. Enforcement of the law is presented as an option, not as a required job function of the President. From GRA:

The Department of Justice's suit against the state of Arizona is based on a lie. It's based on the idea that the President has the ability to decide whether or not to enforce law. The only problem is that to make the argument, they omitted a key word from the Constitution. Here's the DOJ's basis for their argument (page 5, line 12):

The Constitution affords the President of the United States the authority to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

Hmm. According to the DOJ, the Constitution affords the President the authority to enforce law. There's one small problem, however. Here's the Constitution...ahem...in context (article 2, section 3):

He shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

Interestingly, the DOJ cut the quote of right after the word "shall." Shall has a very specific meaning in contractual arrangements. It means action is required to fulfill an obligation. The action MUST occur, or the obligation is not met. In this case "he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The President has the responsibility to enforce all law, and faithfully. He doesn't have the ability to decide whether or not to enforce law. The Constitution compels him to enforce the law. However, the DOJ bases their entire argument on this misquote.

Heh. I'm not surprised.

Tip: Richard L.