Prop. 200 becomes law after injunction lifted

TUCSON - Proposition 200 is now law in Arizona. A federal judge lifted his temporary injunction Wednesday, ruling opponents are unlikely to prove the initiative violates federal law or the U.S. Constitution.

U.S. District Judge David C. Bury rejected arguments that Congress has precluded Arizona and other states from adopting any laws related to checking for legal residency before providing welfare benefits, or from reporting suspected illegal immigrants to federal authorities.

A coalition of opponents led by the California-based Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund had sought to keep Bury’s Nov. 30 injunction in place while all sides prepared for a trial on the legal merits of the law. But Bury said the initiative approved by state voters Nov. 2 should go into effect while opponents decide if they want to keep fighting.

“The rule of law does mean something, after all,” said Rep. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, one of the initiative’s authors. “(Bury) honored the voice of the citizens.”

Bury canceled the injunction after a 90-minute hearing in his Tucson courtroom that attracted dozens of advocates and critics of Proposition 200 from the Valley.

Initiative supporters broke out in smiles and kept repeating “Merry Christmas.” Opponents left court angry and disheartened, saying the judge’s tough questioning of their lawyers showed he already had made up his mind before the hearing. They predicted fear among Arizona’s immigrants about being deported will spread, keeping many from seeking emergency medical care, reporting violent crimes or enrolling their U.S.-born children in school, even though such areas are exempt from Proposition 200.

“This law violates the moral values of the people of Arizona,” said Teo Argueta of Phoenix, a labor union organizer for roofing construction. “The hardworking people I deal with will be even more terrorized.”

Lawyers for the California group said they will appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for an immediate intervention on Bury’s ruling.

“He was wrong on the law,” said Thomas A. Saenz, the group’s vice president of litigation. “He was wrong when he balanced the harm and he doesn’t understand the impact this will have for thousands of people.”

Proposition 200 requires state officials to verify legal residency for “nonfederally mandated” state and local benefits. Government employees must report in writing any welfare applicant they suspect is an illegal immigrant, or those employees could be charged with a Class 2 misdemeanor.

The initiative also requires proof of citizenship to register to vote, and photo identification to cast a ballot in person. Two weeks ago, Bury removed his injunction against the voting provisions, so the state asked the U.S. Justice Department if they comply with federal civil rights law.

State officials and Proposition 200 proponents continue to argue about the intended meaning of “state and local benefits.” Gov. Janet Napolitano and several Valley cities have said they will follow a legal opinion of state Attorney General Terry Goddard that narrowly limits the phrase to state-administered welfare programs that don't rely on federal funding.

After Wednesday’s ruling, Napolitano’s office immediately issued a previously written executive order directing all state agencies to comply with the law. But Goddard’s opinion means the executive order will apply only to four smaller programs administered by the Department of Economic Security, including a $4.2 million program that provides cash to the poor.

And those programs might not see a drop in enrollment, said DES spokeswoman Liz Barker.

“Illegal immigrants already were ineligible to receive general assistance and we checked applicants against the federal database (for legal immigrants),” Barker said. “The real major change is the reporting.”

Many in Arizona are convinced state officials haven’t enforced previous prohibitions on providing welfare to illegal immigrants. Bury said that was a key motivation for the crafting of Proposition 200.

“They wanted to put some teeth into the law,” he said.