A federal judge will hear arguments July 22 on whether to allow Arizona's tough new law aimed at illegal immigrants take effect.
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton will consider a request by three civil rights groups to place the law on hold while the issue of its legality is litigated. They argue that the law unconstitutionally infringes on the exclusive right of the federal government to control immigration policy.
The statute, set to take effect July 29 unless blocked, requires police who have stopped someone for another reason to check their immigration status if they reasonably believe the person is in this country illegally.
Another section permits police to charge illegal immigrants with violating state trespassing laws. There also are provisions aimed at day laborers soliciting work on streets and individuals who knowingly "harbor" illegal immigrants.
Aside from questions of federal preemption, challengers say the law is likely to lead to racial profiling despite a provision in the legislation precluding police from using race, ethnicity or national origin when deciding who to question.
At the same time, Bolton also will consider arguments by Gov. Jan Brewer that the entire lawsuit should be thrown out.
"No part of SB 1070 addresses the admission, authorization or deportation of aliens from the United States," attorneys for the governor argued in their own legal papers. Instead, they argued the legislation simply allows state enforcement of federal immigration laws.
Anyway, the governor's lawyers said, the individuals who are being represented by the three groups - the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigration Law Center, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund - have no right to sue because they cannot show personal harm from the law.
samkat posted at 6:00 pm on Wed, Jun 30, 2010.
There are more ways to skin a cat. If 1070 falls, the state can start auditing employer/employee tax records. the feds cannot interfere in state business. I imagine they can take down a few employers and a heck of a lot of employees for tax fraud through auditing.[smile]
forkedlift1 posted at 10:09 am on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
Yesterday, June 30, The American Bar Association submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. District Court in Arizona recommending a preliminary injunction of SB 1070 until the law's constitutionality can be sorted out in court.
The 27-page brief lays out four aspects of the law that have the ABA concerned.
This is particularly significant in that the American Bar Association represents the legal profession and practicing attorneys nationwide, not just attorneys practicing law in Arizona.
I can think of no other organization whose voice would have a greater impact than that of the American Bar Association. Commendation are in order to the ABA for examining this very serious issue and its recognizable need to file an amicus brief. Thank you ABA.
PortTabacco posted at 2:41 pm on Thu, Jul 1, 2010.
This is a basic tenet of sovereignty---- having defined borders and control of them. Legal American citizens other than La Raza and Democrats want them controlled.
Now why would SB 1070 be considered illegal?
And isn't it strange that these so-called civil rights
groups claim SB 1070 is illegal?
As if they are concerned about anything
illegal? [beam]