Arizona Immigration Law SB 1070 Struck Down By Supreme Court

[AJ]

                                 







                                   ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW 'HEART' STRUCK DOWN BY SUPREME COURT

                                                                       source: fox news latino





                     




Perspectives on the surprise Supreme Court decision striking down three of four provisions of Arizona's controversial immigration law --SB 1070-- were mixed.

Some analysts focused on the upholding of a federal government prerogative over immigration law. Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said: "The heart and soul of the Arizona statute has been struck down by the Supreme Court, consistent with previous Supreme Court opinions that basically say for better or for worse whether you like it or not immigration is a federal issue to be administered by the United States of America by the federal government and not by the states.” While others stressed the one provision left standing by the High Court --the highly controversial "show me your papers" provision of the law requiring state and local police to perform roadside immigration checks if a "reasonable suspicion" exists that someone is in the country illegally.

“Today’s ruling marks a dark day for justice in the history of the United States of America," said Angelica Salas, executive director for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), a regional organization with national impact focused on immigrant and civil rights. "In one sweep, the Supreme Court has sided with Arizona and allowed racial profiling as an acceptable law enforcement tool."

The court essentially weighed whether in passing its own immigration law, Arizona was overstepping its bounds in what traditionally has been a federal matter. Arizona lawmakers said that the federal government had failed in its responsibility to secure the borders and control illegal immigration, and that states -- particularly those on the border -- were forced to deal with the consequences of people living here unlawfully and usurping state resources.

                           

An estimated 11 million people live in the United States illegally -- most of them are Latinos and roughly half are visa overstays.

Arizona's move toward implementing its own immigration law set in motion similar efforts by lawmakers in other states frustrated by illegal immigration. But while some voted on and passed measures seeking to drive out undocumented immigrants, other states put their measures on hold, concerned about overwhelming legal challenges.

In this case, however, the court in its decision indicated that this provision would face further scrutiny.
Since passage in 2010, Arizona's SB1070, has become both a flashpoint for the national debate over immigration and enforcement. The law served as a blueprint for similar laws in other states, including Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah. Courts have blocked implementation of parts of those states' laws pending a decision by the Supreme Court on Arizona's measure.

It also sealed the issue of immigration as an election-year issue, prompting both President Obama and the GOP presidential nominees to take positions on Arizona's law -- they nearly all supported it -- during the extended primary. At one point during the primary, Mitt Romney, now the expected GOP presidential nominee, drew fire when he described Arizona's law as a national model. Later, Romney -- whose support of Arizona's law and hard line positions on immigration have aliented many Latinos -- said he had not meant that all of SB 1070 was a national model, just its E-Verify component, which requires employers to make sure their workers are eligible to work in the United States.

Critics of the law, including Latino rights organizations who feared racial profiling as a result of the enforcement measures, called for an business boycott of Arizona in protest. Proponents of strict immigration enforcement praised the High Court’s support for police checks of immigration status.

“The United States Supreme Court has made it very clear that state and local governments have an important role to play in enforcing federal immigration laws,” said Dan Stein, executive director of Federation for American Immigration Reform. “Even if the Obama administration refuses to enforce most immigration laws, states have the power to deter and discourage illegal aliens from settling or remaining within their jurisdictions.”

Hispanic Leadership Network Executive Director Jennifer Korn said federal inaction on illegal immigration had forced Arizona and other states to take the matter into their own hands. "The blame for inaction cannot be placed on either political party, but on forces within both parties,” Korn said. “It’s unfortunate and undisputable that during the first two years of this Administration, the President and a Democrat-controlled Congress had the opportunity to push through immigration reform, but chose not to. It’s disappointing that this President only talks about immigration when it is politically convenient for him.”

But rearding authority over immigration, Arizona clearly lost. According to Fox News' Napolitano: “Basically the court is saying to those in Arizona who are understandably unhappy with the administration of immigration law by this administration, if you don’t like it -- vote them out of office but don’t try to change the law because you are essentially without authority or sovereignty to do that.”


Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/06/25/arizona-immigration-law-heart-struck-down-by-supreme-court/#ixzz1ypgj4E5D




THREE KEY PROVISIONS THAT WERE STRUCK DOWN:

1. Police could arrest immigrants (Mexicans) without a warrant.

2. Crime for immigrants not to carry official identification.

3. Prevented illegal immigrants from seeking jobs in the U.S.


PROVISION THAT STILL EXISTS:

1. Police can check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.

("Reasonable Suspicion" must exist that the person is in the U.S. illegally.)



 

           

[AJ]

I don't know exactly how I feel about this subject. Half of me is happy because I really didn't want the police to abuse hard working Mexicans by abusing the law and unnecessarily arresting good people.

The other half of me is hoping that immigrants don't abuse their freedoms as well.

I am surprised by the Supreme Court's decision but I am also happy that the decision was a considerate one.

The other conservative Southern states are all going to raise a lot of hell. This isn't over yet but it is a good start to a progressive future.

Meanwhile, Mitt Romney is having a heart attack.

Expect the Supreme Court to overturn the Health Care Law.

[Havana]

This legislation would have set a terrible precedent. With more thought, better legislation can be written (even if it is Arizona) more fairly encompassing and reflecting the needs of all the parties involved.  It  may take some time because it is Arizona, but it can be done.


I'm even more pleased than I would ordinarily be because any time this drunken wench, Jan Brewer, doesn't get her way, I cheer.  She is a purely toxic bitch and I can't stand her...The faster I can get away from thinking about her the better.  Hasta.............

[Chivis]

I am for the Az law, as you know.  do you have the Richard Valdemar video?

two of the elements most people knew would get the ax, i am thankful the main component remains.  states were established with the right of autonomy, this goes a long way to appeasing both sides.

Obama has done nothing to help the border states, all they ask is "if you won't do you job, allow us to help"

BTW  a big bust in Bell last week.  same as Hawaiian Gardens Valdemar spoke about.  Narcos are embedded in so many little poor cities of SoCal...

[Siskiyou_Kid]

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Arizona can ask people for their ID if they're brown on a Saturday night. But, they still can't deport them, because only the feds have the authority to deport. In the ruling the SCOTUS also said that people can't be held for long, unless they're accused of a crime, which is the way it was before this law was passed.

So, what's the point of detaining people for an immigration violation if the state of Arizona can't deport them, and the feds won't take them unless they've been accused of a felony?

[AJ]

RICHARD VALDEMAR TALKS ABOUT THE DRUG CARTELS TAKING OVER LOCAL POLITICS

<nabble_embed></nabble_embed>

[AJ]

I thought the same thing Kid. What has really changed with the AZ immigration law? But Havana said it right......"This legislation would have set a terrible precedent."

And I also can't stand Jan Brewer. She is a mean SOB.

No worries Republicans, conservatives and Tea Baggers. You will have your glory when the Supreme Court overturns the Health Care Bill.

[El Regio]

Siskiyou_Kid wrote

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Arizona can ask people for their ID if they're brown on a Saturday night. But, they still can't deport them, because only the feds have the authority to deport. In the ruling the SCOTUS also said that people can't be held for long, unless they're accused of a crime, which is the way it was before this law was passed.

So, what's the point of detaining people for an immigration violation if the state of Arizona can't deport them, and the feds won't take them unless they've been accused of a felony?

So what do you suggest they do? Let them run free?
Someone has to take charge, if the feds won't then the state must take charge.

[Chimera]

El Regio wrote

So what do you suggest they do? Let them run free?
Someone has to take charge, if the feds won't then the state must take charge.

The Feds are taking charge, and have taken charge. It's called prioritizing. Since there are just too many undocumented aliens to round 'em all up and deport them the federal government has to decide which to go after. So this administration, for example, has made deporting those with criminal records more important that deporting the guy with a clean record who paints houses but got stopped for a broken tail light, or those who have be deported before more important than the guy at Home Depot waiting for a job to drive up.

If you want the Feds to go after all the almost 11 million illegal aliens, tell your reps in Washington to massively increase the appropriate budgets, because there sure aren't enough ICE agents and Immigration Judges to handle that right now.

Also, this administration has deported more illegal aliens per year than any other administration. And whether it's due to policies, state laws, the economy, people returning to Mexico, whatev, the net number of people coming undocumented into the U.S. from Mexico right now is zero.

[eternalcode]

Too many mexican people are not focused on fixing whats wrong with mexico. They are not focused on changing how they think. They are beaten down to the point that they are incapable of understanding that they are the solution for fixing mexico. The mexican people can and must fix mexico themselves.

But instead, they are transferring their frustration to the gringos. What they are doing is very wrong and pathetic and unacceptable.

Unless the mexicans look into the mirror for the solution in mexico they will never fix mexico, they will only spread their disease here. Obviously the disease is spreading here.

[drattler]

Every country in the world has immigration rules,but the USA is Dominated by a political civil rights infatuation,such that any rule/law about immigration is attacked by liberals who see these regulations as racist,profiling etc. The current administration is ruled by political hacks who will do anything for a vote,more than normal,and in doing so have refused to enforce Fed law along the border with Mexico. Arizona steps in the Oboma Fed attacks, think of the money all this insanity has cost. The USA is coming apart at the seams??

[El Regio]

Chimera wrote

The Feds are taking charge, and have taken charge. It's called prioritizing. Since there are just too many undocumented aliens to round 'em all up and deport them the federal government has to decide which to go after. So this administration, for example, has made deporting those with criminal records more important that deporting the guy with a clean record who paints houses but got stopped for a broken tail light, or those who have be deported before more important than the guy at Home Depot waiting for a job to drive up.

If you want the Feds to go after all the almost 11 million illegal aliens, tell your reps in Washington to massively increase the appropriate budgets, because there sure aren't enough ICE agents and Immigration Judges to handle that right now.

Also, this administration has deported more illegal aliens per year than any other administration. And whether it's due to policies, state laws, the economy, people returning to Mexico, whatev, the net number of people coming undocumented into the U.S. from Mexico right now is zero.

Chimera the Feds have been dropping the ball for so long (throughout all recent administrations). They have failed at their job and now the problem has grown too large.

I agree, it wouldn't be wise to go after the average Joe in the street and instead focus on the criminal element however, that too is being overlooked to a certain point. We need to step up efforts to get these people removed immediately but at the same time the border must be secured so they will have a tougher time returning.

You are correct, this administration has deported more illegals than any other admin. prior to them, I congratulate Obama for that.

[AJ]

No one ever talks about the European or Asian immigrants who have extended their stay here. Just the Mexicans. Always the Mexicans.

That's okay. It only makes us tougher. The tougher we are, the harder we work.

There will be a latino president one day too. Conservatives will shit in their pants the day that this happens , especially if he's Mexican.

[Chimera]

You are correct, no administration in recent memory has really done anything pro-active about completely reforming our immigration policies and enforcement. But when you look at what an executive has to work with... I mean, Obama couldn't get the Dream Act passed because of the Republican House of Representatives. Any President is not going to be able to get comprehensive reform (that is not 3/4 catering to special interests) through unless his own party has super-majorities in both houses. And then he'd have to do it by hitting the ground running at the beginning of his 2nd term when nobody has to worry as much about re-election.

Yeah. Politics.

And then there's funding. You have to find the money to pay for all those BP Agents and their gear, and for all the motions sensors and infrared detectors near the border, and for all the drones (yep, they're being used) and the operators and staff, and... and.... and.... and the 30 foot high, 5 foot thick wall of solid steel running from the Gulf to the Pacific with a moat on both sides filled with piranha with lasers mounted on their heads!

[Baggy]

ajulio wrote

No worries Republicans, conservatives and Tea Baggers. You will have your glory when the Supreme Court overturns the Health Care Bill.

Or not........ looks like supreme court upholds the main part of the health care bill. also I heard something funny, Romney who opposed the health care bill has made health care mandatory in the state that he was or is governor of? LOL douchebag. Asif you could ever trust a man named MITT!

[El Regio]

Sorry Chimera but Obama has no excuse, he had control over both houses of Congress and he didn't do anything. He preferred to focus on other issued that he believed more important like GITMO, and Gay marriage.

I see you aren't going to take the topic seriously and rather joke about it.
Perhaps when you feel like having a real discussion we can finish the topic at hand.

[AJ]

His actual name is Willard. Obamacare is actually an extension of Romneycare. Mitt Romney won't admit this though because he is a total flip-flopper. But seems like the Health care law will continue. Thank GOD because many people (including children) were already being insured by this law. Had the Supreme Court struck down this law, many people would have surely suffered. Today is a good day. Americans are all going to have to pay higher taxes but that's okay. It's a part of a Democracy. People have to pay their taxes in order to have benefits and freedoms. The Republicans just don't give a shit.

[Siskiyou_Kid]

His name is Willard? I thought is name was Mittens.

[Chimera]

Well, excuse me! I was using hyperbole to represent the extremes that politicians have to deal with when they are writing legislation such as border control. I will be sure to stick with simple, representative writing with you in the future.

My apologies.

[El Regio]

Chimera wrote

Well, excuse me! I was using hyperbole to represent the extremes that politicians have to deal with when they are writing legislation such as border control. I will be sure to stick with simple, representative writing with you in the future.

My apologies.

You can do as you wish I am simply pointing out your over exaggerated comments that are far from factual. Just making it clear that what you stated is no where near the truth.