Gov. Brewer: ‘This fight is far from over.’
28 July 2010 11:27 pm by Taylor Marsh
Sorry, Jan, but the dumbest thing in the law was expecting—-no, demanding that police be turned into immigration officials.
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law from going into effect, a ruling that at least temporarily squashed a state policy that had inflamed the national debate over immigration.
Judge Susan Bolton of Federal District Court issued a preliminary injunction against sections of the law, scheduled to take effect on Thursday, that called for police officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws and required immigrants to prove that they were authorized to be in the country or risk state charges. She issued the injunction in response to a legal challenge brought against the law by the Obama administration. [...]
From what I’ve read on it so far, most legal analysts believe Judge Bolton’s ruling will likely also cool off other states from following Arizona’s lead, which is very good news. One analysis weighs in that the feds could likely win even after Brewer’s appeal.
Conservatives are blaming the ACLU and the “open borders crowd.”
Here’s more from Arizona:
Key parts of SB 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 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.
• The portion that makes it a crime for illegal immigrants to solicit, apply for or perform work. There are three parts to that part of the law. Two of them will go into effect, one of them will not.
Gov. Brewer has already dragged out the customary “we have already made some progress in waking up Washington” line, so appeal or not, it sounds like she’s resigned to losing to Attorney General Holder. It was a bad law from the start. Making it a crime to walk around while brown was a ludicrous notion from the get go.
Now let’s see what the feds do, because if the states can’t do it one thing Arizona’s actions does do is put more pressure on Obama and the Democrats to act. We’ll then have to see just how far they’ll have to go to get Republicans on board, though with midterms coming up the issue could simply become a political football, yet again.
Do you think the matter will wend its way to the supreme court?
Do you think that the Roberts court would back up the federal gov’t, or Brewer/
“Making it a crime to walk around while brown was a ludicrous notion from the get go.”
Yes, yes it was. But it was also so VERY, very republican.
yep.
This is OT but it is a link that taylor requested on another thread,
http://congressionalconnection.nationaljournal.com/2010/07/despite-tough-climate-public-p.php
Thanks LLady. I don’t think this is very instructive of what we were talking about, however, because the poll is about Obama v. Bush. That people, even independents, prefer Obama over Bush isn’t indicative of the midterms at all.
Opening salvo from your link:
Despite a tough year for President Obama, the public believes his administration’s policies offer a better chance at improving the economy over the policies of his predecessor, former President George W. Bush. …
But I do appreciate the link very much.
• 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 above is a mirror image of current federal immigration law. Her “ruling” on this alone will be reason to challenge. BTW, the ninth circuit court has issued some fairly interesting opinions on immigration issues, so for those who support the judges ruling and think the ninth will uphold the injunction, think twice.
So what is the “left’s” magical solution to the real problems of human trafficking, drug smuggling and other criminal activities, including murder, that happen in Arizona at the border?????????
You won’t get an answer because the left doesn’t have one.
Speculating here, but if there is an answer it will be to legalize 12 million illegals.
Oh, please, cjoblak, you and others on the right want to criminalize being Hispanic.
But honestly, kris, that comment about “legalize 12 million illegals” is stunning. You want the taxpayers to pay for rounding up & deporting 12 million people? That’s laughable.
In general, the right doesn’t want to crack down on employers, which I wrote about in 2006. That’s been a HUGE problem.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/2006/04/03/illegal-immigration-target-employers/
As for border issues, I have no doubt it’s deadly dangerous in some select areas. No doubt more border patrol agents are needed, with the National Guard possible in the worst spots. We’ve also got to deal with Mexico and South American states in conjunction with US policy. Our southern border is a national security issue in some areas. But let’s also remember the 9/11 hijackers came in through Logan airport.
But take a deep breath and don’t widen the issue beyond what is real.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/09/AR2010070902342.html
The Obama administration has already deported over 400,000 in a year and a half Taylor. Given that pace it would take 6 years. And no I am not saying deport 12 million people.
What I am saying is…Judge Bolton hypothesized that the Federalies do not have time or resources to deal with the number of illegal cases that in THEORY could happen under Arizona law. Cry me a river….what about the time and resources being drained from states who flat out can’t afford it. Example: my state of CA. Evidently that’s not important.
I know, in part by doing *exactly* what I wrote about in 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/25/AR2010072501790.html
The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush’s final year in office.
It’s a federal mandate, which is why Arizona’s law should be struck down.
No doubt more federal resources are needed on southern border states. When the Bush tax cuts expire, Obama should definitely put more funding into border security, but also audits.
“Oh, please, cjoblak, you and others on the right want to criminalize being Hispanic.”
and that is bullshit, Taylor.
If you support the Arizona law that’s *exactly* what you want. Cops looking out for anyone who *might* be illegal. What, exactly, does an illegal immigrant look like?
Still no solutions, only the damning of the right.
No, it’s not “exactly” what I want.
My biggest frustration is the inability of SOME ON THE LEFT to acknowledge that federal immigration law SAYS THE SAME FRIGGIN THING as the Arizona law when it calls for immigrants to carry green cards, visas what ever and that law enforcement can stop people and ask to see their papers.
WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT?????
Its about cops catching someone doing something illegal, then asking for their papers. Not the other way around.
See- “caught doing something illegal, such as committing murder, human trafficking,smuggling drugs, property damage, DUI. Then, asking for papers. Sounds like a great idea to me.
Well, considering crime in ALL catagories went DOWN in Az. I guess the ravaging hords of doped up mexicans swarming here to drop one so it’s a citizen just isn’t happening in the reality based universe.
Of course that was never a hinderance to repugnantklaners and teabaggers and xenophobic racists of every stripe from spouting lies and such.
You are missing the point as usual Secular.
I will ask cjoblak’s question…what’s your answer to the immigration issue?
Honestly, I think we have more pressing issues than immigration. But if you forced me to come up with an idea in a sentence or two:
1. Provide a path and timeframe for illegal immigrants to obtain citizenship. Then go after the companies who employ folks not taking that path.
2. Decriminalize marijuana.
Morally, it’s great news. Politically it’s MAY be mixed. This is the sort of hot button issue that the Republicans use time and again to get THEIR voters to the polls. Now with the intensity lowered on, Latinos MAY vote in lesser numbers. The legal process will take its time, and that could mean that immigration could go away as a political issue this November. That could end up helping folks like Meg Whitman in California for example. Mixed bag.
Or here is another answer….maybe if Mexico’s economy could be based on something other than drug running and human trafficking that would help.
See my suggestions above.
kris says:
29 July 2010 at 12:23 pm
What some of you on the right don’t understand is THAT YOU DON’T NEED THE ARIZONA LAW, but also that cops shouldn’t be turned into the Gestapo. More funds are needed for border agents, no doubt.
I find it absolutely absurd to argue that a federal law already in force requires a state law to make it enforceable or a super duper law.
I’ve never discounted they are similar on crime aspects, though the Arizona law goes further. I simply am adamantly opposed to the theory of state immigration laws, which is in the federal mandate, and that we should *not* change the definition of what a cop’s duty is.
Do you know what the argument made by DOJ in the court case?
Isn’t it the duty of all administrations to defend the Constitution? Dosen’t the Constitution state that it is a federal responsibility?
How about ending the bogus war on drugs? Legalization would take a lot of steam out of the drug trade.
kris …I can’t really tell from your comments what it is that you want?
I believe it is the federal governments job but its not doing its job. I did hear also that Jan Brewer might sue the federal government.