A federal right to not enforce the law?

IBD:

After smearing Arizona's immigration law as racial profiling, the Justice Department has issued its lawsuit against the state. But it's not about civil rights anymore. It's about a federal "right" to not enforce U.S. law.

When Arizona passed a law last April mirroring U.S. federal immigration law, it was the opposite of the sort of challenges states historically bring to the feds.

Back when, say, schools were being desegregated, federal troops had to face off against state sheriffs because state laws were in direct contradiction to federal laws.

Not so with Arizona's law, which requires the state to help buttress federal law. That means federal and state agents should be enforcing an out-of-control illegal immigration crisis — brought on by spillover from Mexico's horrific cartel war — together.

But to the politicos now running the federal government, Arizona's law is, for political reasons, painted as racist.

...

Except the case does not mention race because the law was carefully crafted to avoid that trap. The case now relies on federal preemption of state law. In this case it is a state law that actually supports the federal immigration law. It is more than passing strange that the DOJ has not brought a preemption case against a sanctuary city where the local law is for the purpose of nullifying the federal law. The case adds to the impression that this administration is not serious about enforcement of immigration laws.