By Jerry Markon and Stephanie McCrummen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 29, 2010
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most contested provisions of Arizona’s new immigration law one day before they were to take effect, ratcheting up the legal and political debate over the increasingly divisive issue.
U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton’s ruling handed the Obama administration a key initial victory in its lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R). It also set up a legal struggle that is likely to play out over several years and across numerous states, with Brewer vowing to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and legal experts saying the high court is likely to hear it.
In her decision, Bolton accepted the Justice Department’s argument that the law — which empowers police to question people who they have a “reasonable suspicion” are illegal immigrants — intrudes into federal immigration enforcement. She granted much of an injunction the administration had sought, blocking portions of the law from taking effect while the federal lawsuit proceeds.
The judge put on hold provisions that would require police to check immigration status if they stop someone while enforcing other laws, allow for warrantless arrests of suspected illegal immigrants and criminalize the failure of immigrants to carry registration papers. Civil rights groups and federal lawyers had objected to those provisions in particular, while Arizona officials defended them as necessary to fight a tide of illegal immigration.
“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,” wrote Bolton, a Democratic appointee, who allowed other, less-controversial portions of the law to take effect Thursday as scheduled.
The injunction is preliminary and does not guarantee that the administration will prevail in its effort over the next several months to have the entire law declared unconstitutional. But preliminary injunctions must meet a high legal standard, and Bolton specified that the government “is likely to succeed on the merits” of much of its argument.
“The judge is sending a signal to the state: ‘You’re going to have a tough time,’ ” said Jonathan Benner, a Washington lawyer who has argued numerous cases involving federal-state conflicts.
Yet even as the contours of the legal case, which the Justice Department filed July 6, became more clear, the political din over the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants grew louder. Republicans condemned Bolton’s decision and what they called the administration’s failure to fight illegal immigration. They were led by Brewer, who also criticized unspecified “fear-mongers, those dealing in hate” and others who have spurred economic boycotts of the state.
“I will battle all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary,” said Brewer, whose popularity has increased ahead of her reelection bid this fall. She vowed to appeal Bolton’s ruling Thursday to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit and to ask for an expedited review. Experts said that full court, which is controlled by a 15 to 10 Democratic-appointed majority, is unlikely to side with Arizona.
The Supreme Court — with a working conservative majority — ———read more
http://washingtonpost.com
Possibly related articles:
Arizona appeals judge’s ruling on immigration law
By Jerry Markon and Robert Barnes
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, July 30, 2010
Hundreds of opponents of Arizona’s new immigration law swarmed the streets of downtown Phoenix Thursday, confronting police in riot gear as the state’s governor filed an urgent appeal of a judge’s ruling that prevented key portions of the law from taking effect.
Condemning what they called the “terrorizing” of Hispanics, protesters blockaded a jail and marched to the offices of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, known for his aggressive stance on illegal immigrants. The sheriff vowed a “crime sweep” targeting illegal immigrants but later postponed the raids. At least 17 protesters were arrested.
With the case’s future uncertain, the demonstrations illustrated that tensions over the state’s immigration crackdown may only have been heightened by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton’s ruling Wednesday in the Obama administration’s lawsuit against Arizona. Bolton temporarily blocked the law’s most controversial sections, but protesters objected to other provisions that she allowed to take effect on Thursday.
A day after Bolton’s decision riveted attention on illegal immigration, it was clear that the increasingly divisive debate is spreading nationwide.
Nearly 20 states have introduced bills similar to the Arizona law, and nine states with Republican attorneys general are planning to file appellate briefs supporting Arizona. Immigration is a key theme in this fall’s midterm elections; at the same time conservative candidates are attacking what they say is the Obama administration’s aggressive expansion of government.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R), whose fierce criticism of the federal lawsuit has helped her popularity at home, on Thursday appealed Bolton’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Urging the court to quickly hear the case, she vowed that she “will not back down.” The Justice Department, whose lawsuit against Arizona was a rare federal challenge of a state law, declined to comment.
If the political reactions to Bolton’s decision were predictable, the legal path forward was not. The 9th Circuit has a liberal reputation, and court officials said the case will be heard by a “motions panel” designed for urgent appeals. The panel this month consists of three judges who, like Bolton, were appointed by Democratic presidents.
But if the panel’s decision is appealed to the full 9th Circuit, 10 of the 11 judges will be chosen by a random computerized draw. The 11th jurist will be Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, a Republican appointee………………..read more
http://washingtonpost.com
Possibly related articles:
Sheriff Joe Arpaio: I’ll Enforce Arizona’s Immigration Law
Wednesday, 28 Jul 2010 05:21 PM
Article Font Size
By: Jim Meyers
Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the controversial top cop in Maricopa County, Ariz., tells Newsmax he will jail any protesters who attempt to block his jail on Thursday when provisions of his state’s tough new immigration law take effect.
Arpaio also says it’s “great” if undocumented aliens react to the new law and his strict anti-illegal immigration agenda by moving back to Mexico or to the “sanctuary state” of California, and challenges President Barack Obama to invite him to the White House for a “wine summit” to discuss illegal immigration.
Arpaio, whose county includes most of the Phoenix metropolitan area, promotes himself as “America’s toughest sheriff.” He has limited county inmates to two meals a day, banned “sexually explicit material” in prison, reinstituted chain gangs, and set up a “tent city” as an extension of the Maricopa County Jail.
On Wednesday a judge blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona’s new law and put them on hold. The law will still take effect on Thursday, but without some of the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.
Nevertheless there are reports that opponents of the new law plan to block Arpaio’s jail on Thursday in an act of civil disobedience.
“There’s a rumor that they’re going to block our jails down the street,” Arpaio says in an exclusive Newsmax interview.
“You know what? They’re not going to block our jails. They’re going into the jail if they block our jail. I’m not going to succumb to these demonstrators keeping law enforcement from booking people in our jail. So we may have to take some action.”
Arpaio also vows to conduct a “crime suppression operation” on Thursday.
“This morning we raided another business and arrested five more illegal aliens with false identification. On Thursday we’re going to do our 17th crime suppression operation and go out with our volunteer posse and deputy sheriffs and catch criminals. We’ve done 16. Just by chance about two-thirds [of those arrested] happen to be here illegally.
“People say, why are you doing it on the day that the law may be put in effect? Well, should I wait? We’ve been enforcing the other state immigration laws and we’re still the only ones doing it. We’re going to continue doing our job.”
Arpaio was asked about concerns that the federal government will refuse to cooperate with a handoff of illegal aliens to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency after they are apprehended in Arizona.
“There’s been some rumbles that maybe ICE will not take the illegal aliens off the hands of law enforcement,” he responds.
“So we may have a little problem, but not that big, because most of the time we arrest illegal aliens we have them on another charge and we book them into our jail.
“After people do their time and we have them deported, if [ICE doesn’t] accept many of those people who are going to be deported, the only alternative is that they may be released on the street.
“So let’s see what the federal government does. I know they’re not happy with this new law. They’re not happy with me, because I had 100 deputies trained by Homeland Security, trained to work on the streets and function as federal officers, but they took that away when the new administration took office.”
There have been media reports that with the law taking effect, many Hispanics are moving out of Phoenix this weekend —————-read more
newsmax.com
Possibly related articles:
Obama Biography:
1. Birthplace: Location remains questionable.
2. Proof of United States Citizenship hasn’t been provided.
3. Education: Columbia University, Harvard Law School. Records never
produced, attendance remains questionable.
4. Military Career: None
5. Business Career: None
6. Political Career: Community organizer, Chicago, 1983-86; civil rights attorney, Chicago, 1991-96, University of Chicago, lecturer, early 1990s-2004;Illinois State
Senator, 1996-2005; U.S. Senator, 2005-2008.
President 2008-.
Possibly related articles:
Politically connected Wyly brothers charged with fraud
July 29, 2010 Washington Post Alert
The SEC has charged Samuel Wyly and Charles Wyly — billionaire brothers in Texas who have been major political donors to conservative campaigns — with reaping more than $550 million through fraudulent practices. The Wylys violated federal securities laws by using offshore accounts to secretly trade the shares of public companies whose boards they sat on, the SEC alleged.
For more information, visit washingtonpost.com:
Possibly related articles:
Loading ...
