Chuck Fleischmann, Robin Smith and Van Irion, Republican candidates for Congress in the 3rd District, expressed their disapproval of the ruling by a federal judge (Susan Bolton) that places an injunction on parts of the Arizona immigration law.

Mr. Fleischmann said, "This is exactly what people in America are sick and tired of. Not only does the federal government fail miserably when it comes to sealing our border and protecting or sovereignty as a nation, they trample on the sovereignty of the states when they try and defend themselves. Whose side is our federal government on?

"Instead of getting in the way, our federal government should be finishing the border fence, using the most up-to-date electronic surveillance equipment, and cracking down on employers of illegal immigrants. The time has long passed since this became an imperative issue; our national security and economic well-being are at stake. The federal government should stop using the court system to infringe upon states' rights, and start using their power to seal our border."

Ms. Smith said, “The lawsuit against Arizona by the Obama Justice Department should never have taken place. Now that a decision has been rendered, I support and encourage Governor Jan Brewer and her government in their pursuit of an appeal and their efforts to keep the fight for secure borders alive.

"This law was the direct result of the federal government’s failure to meet its Constitutional responsibility when it comes to securing our borders and protecting our citizens, both physically and economically. As long as President Obama continues to turn the force of his government on the states instead of the border, this problem will fester and grow.

"I agree with the vast majority of Tennesseans who wish to see legislation similar to the Arizona law enacted in our state. As part of a new conservative majority in Congress, we will secure our border, end the push for amnesty and take national security seriously.”

Mr. Irion called it “absolutely absurd,” adding, “the court’s opinion says that federal law preempts state law. That is true, but it’s also irrelevant. Preemption doctrine does not prevent local agencies from enforcing federal law. For example, local police can stop a bank robber from robbing the bank despite the fact that bank robbery laws are federal laws. Telling Arizona that it can’t enforce federal immigration law is as absurd as telling a sheriff that he can’t arrest a bank robber. Even if the Arizona law is preempted, the Arizona police should still be allowed to detain people that they believe are here illegally, because they are enforcing federal law.

“The court struck down the portion of the Arizona law that requires Arizona police to send a request to the federal Department of Justice to verify immigration status of detained individuals. The court explained that this portion of the law would over burden the Department of Justice and force the DOJ to change its own priorities in order to respond to Arizona’s requests for immigration status information. However, the court’s statement is just absurd. Arizona police can request information until the cows come home. Nothing in the Arizona law forces the DOJ to respond.

“As background you must understand that all law enforcement agencies must either charge or release any individual within a fairly short period of time, usually between 48 and 72 hours of arrest. An Arizona police officer picking up an individual for committing some other crime can charge them, or release them, within this time period. If the DOJ doesn’t respond within this time period to a request for immigration status, then the individual must be released, or charged with some other crime.

“In other words, the Arizona request for information is no different than any law enforcement agency running a check for outstanding warrants from other agencies on any individual they’ve arrested. The Federal Court’s ruling is essentially the same as saying local law enforcement can no longer check with the FBI for outstanding warrants because such a request would force the FBI to change its priorities. This is absurd. Anyone in law enforcement can tell you, requests for information directed to the FBI or the DOJ may be answered in a timely manner or may not be, but making the request doesn’t force the agency to change its procedures.

“This is a purely political ruling. Unfortunately, the Federal Courts no longer serve as a check on the executive and legislative branches of our government. They’ve abdicated this primary role just like they’ve abdicated their mandate to enforce the Constitution. They have become politicized rubber stamps for every unconstitutional piece of legislation to come out of Washington. This ruling is just the latest example of this undeniable fact."