Judge blocks most of Arizona's SB1070 law

[Little-Acorn]

Breaking news.

Judge Bolton said the law had to be put on hold until "courts resolve the issues". What, exactly, are these "issues"?

-----------------------------------

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration

Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

By Jacques Billeaud And Amanda Myers
Associated Press Writers
7 mins ago

PHOENIX – A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.

The overall law will still take effect Thursday, but without the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.

[NOTE: The judge blocked parts of the AZ state law. But Federal law still requires imigrants to carry copies of their immigration papers. -Ed.]

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled that the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues.

The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law at 12:01 a.m. Thursday and protesters were planning a large demonstrations to speak out against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them their immigration status.

The volume of the protests will be likely be turned down a few notches because of the ruling by Bolton, a Clinton appointee who suddenly became a crucial figure in the immigration debate when she was assigned the seven lawsuits filed against the Arizona law.

Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona — the busiest illegal gateway into the country — to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants.

 

[Little-Acorn]

You should check out the judge's actual written ruling in this case. It can be found at:

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/072810_ArizonaRuling.pdf

The judge points out that SB1070 is not a freestanding law itself, but is simply a group of amendments to existing Arizona state law.

First the judge says that there are parts of SB1070 that she does NOT block. And she lists them:

Portions of Section 2 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 11-1051(A): prohibiting Arizona officials, agencies, and political subdivisions from limiting enforcement of federal immigration laws

A.R.S. § 11-1051(C)-(F): requiring that state officials work with federal officials with regard to unlawfully present aliens

A.R.S. § 11-1051(G)-(L): allowing legal residents to sue any state official, agency, or political subdivision for adopting a policy of restricting enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law

Section 4 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-2319: amending the crime of human smuggling

Portion of Section 5 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-2928(A)-(B): creating a crime for stopping a motor vehicle to pick up day laborers and for day laborers to get in a motor vehicle if it impedes the normal movement of traffic

Section 7 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 23-212: amending the crime of knowing employment of unauthorized aliens

Section 8 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 23-212.01: amending the crime of intentional employment of unauthorized aliens

Section 9 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 23-214: amending the requirements for checking employment eligibility

Section 11 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 41-1724: creating the gang and immigration intelligence team enforcement mission fund

Then she says that there are parts of SB1070 that Obama is likely to succeed in challenging, and so she's blocking them until this is resolved. And she names those, too:

Portion of Section 5 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-2929: creating a separate crime for a person in violation of a criminal offense to transport or harbor an unlawfully present alien or encourage or induce an unlawfully present alien to come to or live in Arizona

Section 10 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 28-3511: amending the provisions for the removal or impoundment of a vehicle to permit impoundment of vehicles used in the transporting or harboring of unlawfully present aliens

Portion of Section 2 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 11-1051(B): requiring that an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is unlawfully present in the United States, and requiring verification of the immigration status of any person arrested prior to releasing that person

Section 3 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-1509: creating a crime for the failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers

Portion of Section 5 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-2928(C): creating a crime for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work

Section 6 of S.B. 1070 A.R.S. § 13-3883(A)(5): authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe the person has committed a public offense that makes the person removable from the United States

One fellow told me that, while the judge has blocked SB1070's **REQUIREMENT** that Arizona state officers must ask for someone's immigrations status under certain constitutions... she has not FORBIDDEN the cops to ask for it. I don't know if that's true.

Does SB1070 give PERMISSION to Arizona state and local cops, to ask for IDs of people they encounter, separately from the section where it REQUIRES them to ask?

If so, then the judge's blocking the REQUIREMENT, doesn't block the AUTHORIZATION. And cops can still ask for immigration status of someone they run into who was speeding, shoplifting etc. if they want to. And turn them over to ICE.

 

[Gipper]

Can't expect a Clinton appointee to abide by the Constitution.

 

[PLC1]

The federal government doesn't want to enforce immigration laws, but they don't want the states to do it either.

It really wouldn't be terribly difficult to streamline legal immigration so that it doesn't take years, and enforce the law against hiring illegals. We could also ask for proof of legal status when enrolling kids in school or applying for any sort of government programs. That way, all of the illegals would have to return to their home countries and try it again, legally this time. They would have to have a background check, of course, to screen out felons, but then they could immigrate and not have to live in the shadows.

But, then, they might demand a living wage, just like legal residents do. We can't have that, now can we?

 

[dogtowner]

Can't expect a Clinton appointee to abide by the Constitution.

wonder how they bought her off ? lets see if Kagan drops off...