Wednesday, July 28, 2010

sb1070: BLOCKED

Judge Blocks Most Controversial Sections of sb1070
A federal judge dealt a serious blow to Arizona's immigration law on Wednesday when she put most of the crackdown ON HOLD just hours before it was to take effect. For now, opponents of the law have prevailed: The provisions that angered opponents will not take effect, including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.

Key parts of Senate Bill 1070 that will not go into effect Thursday:
•The portion of the law that requires an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there's reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.
•The portion that creates a crime of failure to apply for or carry "alien-registration papers."
•The portion that makes it a crime for illegal immigrants to solicit, apply for or perform work. (This does not include the section on day laborers.)
•The portion that allows for a warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe they have committed a public offense that makes them removable from the United States.

"Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked," U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton said in her decision.

Unfortunately, renegade Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County has already decided to go ahead and mount a crackdown on Thursday (tomorrow), hinting he'll instruct police forces under his command to enforce the law's harsh provisions regardless of what Bolton orders. And ironically, he's threatening to jail those who interfere.

So basically, he's going to punish those who practice civil disobedience by locking them up, whilst pulling an Andrew Jackson himself. Yeah, that makes perfect sense (well, it does to a radical right wing reactionary whose only allegiance is to an uncompromising strict-father worldview).

The text of Judge Bolton's order is available from our document vault. It's pretty satisfying to open it up and see that the case is titled United States of America, Plaintiff, v. State of Arizona, and Janice K. Brewer, Governor of the State of Arizona, in her Official Capacity, Defendants.

In deciding to only set aside parts of SB 1070, Judge Bolton reasoned:
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has concluded that allowing a state to enforce a state law in violation of the Supremacy Clause is neither equitable nor in the public interest. Cal. Pharmacists Ass’n v. Maxwell-Jolly, 563 F.3d 847, 852-53 (9th Cir. 2009); Am. Trucking Ass’ns, Inc. v. City of L.A., 559 F.3d 1046, 1059-60 (9th Cir. 2009). If Arizona were to enforce the portions of S.B. 1070 for which the Court has found a likelihood of preemption, such enforcement would likely burden legal resident aliens and interfere with federal policy. A preliminary injunction would allow the federal government to continue to pursue federal priorities, which is inherently in the public interest, until a final judgment is reached in this case. See Am. Trucking, 559 F.3d at 1059-60.


ultima said...

Judge Bolton erred. There is no reason why checking the bona fides of those stopped for other violations in a greater infringement than it is for checking one's drivers license or verifying all the dependents one claims are real.

What is is missing here is a ruling that says the police cannot detain a person for more than some reaonable specified period of time just as they would for checking for a stolen vehicle or drivers license,etc.

I relish the thought of a quick and able appeal all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

Why would anyone expect a different outcome from this judge who is after all a Clinton appointment.

Dee said...

Actually Ultima, it is you who has erred.

The judge was quite clear. The question to the defense, "How long does it take to check with ICE to determine Immigration status?" The response, "I don't know."

What you fail to understand is, during suppression sweeps in Latino neighborhoods, it may take hours to check with ICE to determine Immigration status. Many citizens are caught up in this lengthy delay. It often takes hours. A drivers license is not sufficient. Plus they check status of everyone in the car.

I know you will come back and ask "why" a drivers license is not sufficient. Because in NM proof of citizenship is not a requirement for a drivers license plus arpaio and his goons think "illegals" have access to false documents, so they racially profile and hold those they think are illegal and then release them once ICE verifies citizenship. This happens during every one of his sweeps. Just read the reports. 100 arrested, 27 "illeegals" identified. This is one of the reasons arpaio is currently under investigation for racial profiling.

I just saw Sheriff Dupnik on MSNBC. He says most sheriffs in AZ do NOT want to turn the rest of the state into Maricopa County. He is glad much of the bill was blocked.

pcorn54 said...

Yeah, and look at the other side yelling and whining, all of them Constitutional scholars.

It seems for the anti's who yell and holler about "rule of law" and the steadfastness of the Constitution, that only applies when things go their way.

This is a Constitutional issue and Judge Bolton did the right thing. Next stop, 9h Circuit, 2nd Stop, 9th Circuit full court, and finally SCOTUS a couple of years down the road.

I believe Judge Boltons ruling will stand.

The parts you mentioned that weren't enjoined, there is no Constitutional question about them at this time until someone is harmed by by the remaining sections. I think eventually, those also will fail under 4th and 10th amendment arguments

Vicente Duque said...

New York Daily News : NYC Council condemns Arizona, supports Lawsuit against SB1070, bans Council employees using public funds to travel to AZ, authorizes support of Lawsuits against AZ - My Big List of City Condemners

New York Daily News
City Council rejects Arizona boycott, OKs resolution in support of lawsuit against immigration law
BY Frank Lombardi
July 30th 2010

City Council rejects Arizona boycott, OKs resolution in support of lawsuit against immigration law

My Growing List of City Condemners :

Ann Arbor MI, Austin TX, Amherst MA, Baltimore MD, Berkeley CA, Boston MA, Bloomington IN, Boulder CO, Brownsville TX, Burlington VT, Calexico CA, Chula Vista CA, Coachella CA, Chicago IL, Columbus OH, Cook County IL ( Chicago is inside ), Durham NC, El Paso TX, Fulton County GA, Gallup NM, Hartford CT, Hayward CA, Inwood NY, Kansas City MO, Los Angeles City CA, Los Angeles County CA, Lucas County OH ( Toledo inside ), Monterey County CA, New York City Council, New York State Senate ( in Albany NY ), Oakland CA, Pasadena CA, Paterson NJ, Portland OR, Richmond CA, San Antonio TX, San Diego CA, San Jose CA, San Pablo CA, Santa Ana CA, St. Paul MN, Santa Monica CA, San Francisco CA, Seattle WA, Tacoma WA, Washington DC, West Hollywood CA, etc ...

Vicente Duque

Page Hits