Download a copy of the MOTION TO INTERVENE
Download a copy of the PROPOSED INTERVENOR COMPLAINT
Download a copy of PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO RICHARD MACK’S MOTION TO INTERVENE
Download a copy of RICHARD MACK’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO INTERVENE
U.S. v. Arizona Intervention
When Judge Bolton ruled in favor of U.S. in U.S. v. Arizona, she set the precedent that the Executive branch can set their own priorities even if those priorities directly conflict with properly passed legislation. If this precedent is left standing, We The People have no voice. We can elect Congressman to pass laws such as the Immigration law passed in 1996, but it will have no effect if the Executive branch has the permission of the Judicial branch to ignore Legislative mandates. The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act says “shall” which means “must, you have no choice”. The Executive Branch has no authority to “set their own priorities”, that is the role of Congress.
The current motion is a Motion to Intervene filed in the Arizona District Court that ruled in U.S. v. Arizona. Accompanying the motion is a proposed third party complaint with counter claims against the United States and the Department of Homeland Security. Success in this motion will help to restore the Separation of Powers and force the Executive branch to follow and enforce the law.
About Plaintiff Richard Mack
Richard Mack is a United States citizen, resident of the State of Arizona, a former Sheriff for Graham County, Arizona, and was one of the parties that successfully challenged aspects of the Brady Bill in the Supreme Court. The Brady Bill attempted to compel state law enforcement officers to act at the direction of the federal government. See Printz/Mack v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). Richard Mack is also an author and lecturer on the subjects of State Sovereignty, the 10th Amendment, and the proper role of law enforcement in American government.