Obama / Holder don't use Aristotelian logic in case.

http://tinyurl.com/28v2bp3
Sanctuary cities become new target in immigration debateArizona immigration law goes into effect Padro Garcia AP
Opponents of the Justice Department's lawsuit challenging the enforcement of Arizona's controversial illegal-immigration law have hit upon a strategy to highlight what they contend is a gaping inconsistency in the Justice Department's policy priorities. Why should federal attorneys be targeting the Arizona law as an alleged obstacle to coherent and centralized enforcement of federal immigration statutes, they argue, while Justice officials also have done nothing to challenge the legal status of so-called sanctuary cities, which effectively block enforcement of the same federal law?... ****First the issue was to be "racial profiling" but there was none and one can't claim it prospectively, anyway. The actual Federal case filed against Arizona now claims interference with Federal immigration law. HOWEVER, the AZ law is careful to parallel Federal law in all respects and merely offers to help enforce it. Holder really can't claim interference from a law that duplicates Federal law while ignoring specific acts and laws of sanctuary cities that THWART Federal law. The argument that there would, after Arizona, be 50 different immigration laws falls if all states duplicate the Federal Law. More so, the many more CITIES that each write their own sanctuary laws would have multiple immigration laws, and more than 50 and potentially all different from each other; certainly all different from the Federal Law. These guys aren't even smart lawyers ( and smart lawyers aren't necessarily smart! )****