Monday morning, the Supreme Court ruled 5-3 against key sections of Arizona's controversial SB 1070 law, while leaving the most hotly disputed provision intact.
The Courts struck down sections 3, 5, and 6 of the law because they were preempted by federal law. Those sections of the law did the following:
- Section 3 made it a state misdemeanor for illegal immigrants to not carry around their federal alien registration documents at all times
- Section 5(C) made it a crime for illegal aliens to look for work in the state of Arizona, something that is not a crime in federal immigration law
- Section 6 said that Arizona police officer could arrest without a warrant anyone they suspected of being an illegal alien
The most controversial part of the law was Section 2(B), which requires Arizona police to make a “reasonable attempt . . . to determine the immigration status” of anyone they arrest or detain if they have "reasonable suspicion" that the individual might be an illegal immigrant. That portion of the law was left unscathed, though it may be subject to future legal challenges on the basis that it incentivizes racial profiling. The ACLU has already vowed to continue fighting the law in court.
The Court said that "without the benefit of a definitive interpretation" of Section 2(B) by Arizona state courts, they would be unable to determine whether or not that portion of the bill conflicted with federal immigration law. "This opinion does not foreclose other preemption and constitutional challenges to the lawas interpreted and applied after it goes into effect," the Court's legal decision reads.
The law was passed in April 2010 in the midst of a national furor, with critics calling it the "Papers, Please" law and insisting that it would lead to widespread racial profiling. From the very beginning, the law was subject to numerous legal challenges, including a lawsuit from the federal Justice Department. According to the Tucson Citizen, Arizona state officials have spent over $3 million defending the law, most of it coming from private donations.
Republican candidate for president Mitt Romney at one point called the Arizona law a “model” for the country as the nation grapples with immigration, but later walked those comments back to say it was the state’s employee status verification law he supported. He also said he would throw out the federal government’s lawsuit on the matter.
He remained silent on Arizona during his speech on immigration to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials conference last Thursday.
“Politically, this is probably the worst of all outcomes if you’re Mitt Romney,” MSNBC’s Chuck Todd said on Jansing & Co. shortly after the ruling was handed down. “What we learn from the Supreme Court is simple: there can’t be 50 different immigration laws..."
Todd added: "Any day they’re talking about immigration is a bad day for [the Romney] campaign.”
UPDATE: Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has released a statement calling it a "victory":
Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court is a victory for the rule of law. It is also a victory for the 10thAmendment and all Americans who believe in the inherent right and responsibility of states to defend their citizens. After more than two years of legal challenges, the heart of SB 1070 can now be implemented in accordance with the U.S. Constitution.
[...]
Of course, today’s ruling does not mark the end of our journey. It can be expected that legal challenges to SB 1070 and the State of Arizona will continue. Our critics are already preparing new litigation tactics in response to their loss at the Supreme Court, and undoubtedly will allege inequities in the implementation of the law. As I said two years ago on the day I signed SB 1070 into law, ‘We cannot give them that chance. We must use this new tool wisely, and fight for our safety with the honor Arizona deserves.'
However, Pete Williams of NBC News noted on MSNBC Monday that "it’s the narrowest possible victory for the state, because the court struck down three [provisions].”
UPDATE II: The executive director of Arizona's State Democratic Party, Luis Heredia, has also issued a statement:
The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled section 2B of SB 1070 to be constitutional. That does not make it just or moral. Other parts were ruled unconstitutional as further evidence why this law is flawed.
[...]
This law is simply a tool of divisive voices for political gain, one that damages our state's credibility and economy. As a result, Arizona families have paid the price with $23 million in lost tax revenue and at least $350 million lost in direct spending by convention-goers. SB 1070 has failed Arizona.
Today’s decision is a call to action. It reminds us of the rash and irresponsible overreach of the Republican Legislature. It also signals that now is the time to elect leaders who will get our state back on track. Arizona families deserve better politicians who respect law enforcement, work to create jobs and enact laws that will protect the individual rights of all citizens.
The Supreme Court has said section 2B of SB 1070 is constitutional. That does not make it right.
Rose Gordon Sala contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
So now we have not only Liberals, and the President, but the Supreme Court placing Illegal Aliens over US citizens. The burden of support for education, medical coverage, food stamps, etc... for Illegal Immigrants will continue to be carried by the Tax Payer, while the State has no authority to stop it, and the Federal Government refuses to. The Federal Government has failed the citizenry.
The term "illegal immigrant" is fiction like the boogie man.
Any foreign citizen can enter the US for a period of 90 days. Longer with a note from a physician, university acceptance, or citizen spouse.
It is legal for immigrants to apply for work while in the US.
Employers are required to document all foreign workers using form I-129 after no US citizens apply after adverting a job for 30 days (click here).
Immigrants become undocumented when employers refuse to pay the fee.
"Illegal immigrants" are a fabrication created by news organizations populated by uneducated journalists.
The correct term is "illegal employer".
It is a treaty violation to deport from certain states.
Crack, What would you call an Immigrant that has violated any of the Federal Laws you wrote of? Would a person exceeding the 90 period, by lets say 10 years, not be in the United States illegally? And why are work and student visas required? What is the point of having Federal Programs that strictly define a legal process for Foreign Nations to lawfully enter the United States if any one can simply cross the US Border at will? Why is there a need for the President to bypass congress to grant amnesty to Foreign Nationals that failed to comply with Federal Immigration Law?
Undocumented.
The correct term is undocumented.
The Mexican American War separated families that still visit one another on both sides of the border.
Immigrants are only illegal and subject to deportation if they have broken certain laws.
Immigrants become undocumented when the date on the last visa application has passed.
Undocumented immigrants become documented by filling out documentation that has a new date.
Immigrants use forms to do that similar to what you do at the DMV.
This rule is not enforced on the Canadian border.
All of the terrorists that have entered the US came through Canada.
The new immigration laws created by Bush were intended to combat terrorism, which is why things got screwed up beyond belief when the same rules were applied to employment law (at least people are trying).
Duh.
You fill out a form at the border crossing.
Agents can make you stand in line but they can't turn people away with no reason.
If you get caught sneaking across the border in the middle of the night, ICE will take your picture and finger prints. Anyone that gets caught sneaking across is banned for a few years.
ICE uses biometrics that can recognize foreign criminals based on things like fingerprints and face recognition.
Police don't have access to that system.
Ergo.
Arizona has converted police into immigrant chauffeurs to/from a location where they do.
Arizona skipped step 1.
Take your pick on the other of the other two steps.
Crackhead...guess what fool...not everyone goes through a border crossing...the ones who don't are called ILLEGAL immigrants because they crossed into the country ILLEGALLY. Its not the ones that are caught and returned that are the real problems. It is the ones that are not caught...They are here ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
you can plan the stupid word game all you want, but it does change the facts...
just saying....
As always....crickets...
just saying...
If John .F Kennedy what his speech would be today.......Think of his voice inflections...as you read.
Today...as a.nation.. We have not yet come to the promise.. of a world of known as freedom.. As it would be known today..............We have not failed as a nation of people.........Yet as a government we have opened doors... for business and they have prospered... and made there way to all corner's of the earth
Yet their of those who believe that the loopholes in the written words give them right to exercise control the moral beliefs of what the words where written in the Constitution. To them, I say We the people are the bearers of the torch of freedom.....
Let it be known to those who's wishes are contradictory to the rights that are God given.. will not be of the few...but of the many.
JFK did have a way of using words............
The Earth isn't flat....We have landed men on the Moon..yet I don't think he's dream is gone
xxx, I don't believe any one is promoting the end of immigration. There is a lawful system in place to grant access and citizenship to Foreign Nationals and it must be either enforced or rewritten. To circumvent the Laws of the passed by the legislative body or our government, signed by the President, and upheld by the US Supreme Courts is an attack on the Constitution and our way of life. President Obama has asserted himself to the position of Dictator, by failing to enforce our existing laws and disregarding the Supreme Court.
Prove it.
Provide a link to something with proof that anything done at the federal level violates a law at the federal level. It is not legal to detain and deport people that are here legally regardless of their documentation status. If they are here illegally, ICE deports them when they get credible information.
So far, all the "news" information about immigration is a complete fabrication on both sides.
Look.
The issue is that the Arizona governor cannot fabricate new international treaties when that responsibility belongs to a congress that is focusing exclusively on things like abortion.
That is why the supreme court ruled the way they did.
If the US congress doesn't like it, then they can get busy and pass a new immigration law.
Arizona can't do that.
In fact, farmers that represent a critical national resource are harmed when legal immigrant workers are deported for lack of ID. Federal law excludes ID requirements for seasonal agricultural workers, and it is illegal to detain or deport those workers even if they have no ID.
Crack, The US Border Patrol in San Diego has captured and deported Mexican Nationals for simply crossing the border illegally for the past 50 years. I have seen them pick them up, put them on a bus, transport them to Mexico, and release them in the same day. 20 years ago the only time the Border Patrol flagged an individual for the court system was when they were either smuggling or they had been transported back to Mexico three times. To the best of my knowledge, they are still doing the same thing here in San Diego. If what you are saying is true, I see no point in the existence of ICE, the visa system, or any other laws related to immigration.
oh 2ez4u2c2 you are so dilussional on what obama does. he has deported more "illegal" immigrants than bush and as fro the "illegal immigrants taking away fro americans, well that is so far from the the truth as you can get. as far as jobs go,well they take the jobs that snobs like you will not take because they are beneath you. then let us blame employers who hire the "illegal" immigrants at below minimum wages and pay hardly any taxes. this is where the reform needs to be. so, please get your "FACTULA LIES" stright befor opening your mouth.
oops my bad, please get your "FACTUAL LIES" straight before opening your mouth.
Billie, Would you support unobstructed access to the US from China, Iran, or every other country? Do you believe there should be not controls at all?
2ez4u2c2 Billie a COOK, She just contradicted herself. She supports OBUMA ,she doesn't even realize the damage he's doing. Obuma likes playing golf alot.
Big win for BRewer and Arizona...congrats, Jan Brewer...you stood your ground, this is a big victory...(Sections overturned were already on the Federal books, so they were pre-empted)...
oh by the way- the court ruled UNANIMOUSLY to support the main provision (2b) about stopping people and checking their ID...
now the issue is what the President pulled 10 days ago...Az cops may arrest an illegal, ICE will ask "Has he committed a crime?"...Arizona cops if they say "no" will have to let him go...ugh...
I see it as a win win. now we can get down to the brass tacks of implementation.
mention the 3 things struck down that you did not mention catt. part of those 3 things are about those ID's.............and warrents............
Come_And_Take_Them!,
You do realize you just identified yourself as a potential war criminal according to the UN definition by saying it is OK to stop everyone that has brown skin with no cause?
Right?
Stop people that have broken a law, then check EVERYONES immigration status.
that's the implementation I want to see. how they do this without profiling. the brass tacks or the real meat of doin it. ya see most righties here by their comments don't know there are blue eyed fair skinned south of the border folks. some even have red hair........
now how are gonna arrest a brown person while the fair skinned person is on the other side of the steet laughing at ya?
this is the win win I'm talking about. it's gonna go back to court as to what is profiling an American citizen........and yes it ain't over............what is an American citizen supposed to look like?????????
hesback-
the 3 parts struck down were largely academic...since they were premepted by Federal Law...so I am not worried about those...the meat of the law was upheld...8-0 even...so it wasn't a partisan issue.
Crackhead- very aptly named...War criminal huh??? that's hilarious...1) its the UN, so I couldn't care less...2) how do I prove my immigration status...I am not an immigrant...I DO have a driver's license...that should be sufficient, thanks. I don't think illegals get issued those things, so there you go. traffic stop, check ID, registration, and insurance. if I get stopped, i get a fine. if an illegal gets stopped, they SHOULD be put in touch with a friendly ICE agent...they've just broken the law...and if by virtue of nothing else (ignoring that they are here illegally), they've just committed a crime...grounds for ICE...
see how simple that is???
war criminal...lol...good one... :P
hesback-
i think the implementation is evident...1) they HAVE to be doing something wrong...this won't be a "round em up off the street" operation...2) if they are doing something wrong, they have to provide ID, just like ANY American citizen would have to do. If they can't, and they can't GET any ID ("I left my license at home" or something), then at THAT point they get checked into for citizenship status...illegal? over and done with. whether they are dark, light, blonde, brown...no profiling, just following the law.
Looks like I need to repeat this.
Victory!!!
Arizona just turned the police into taxi drivers for immigrants.
Win win WiN WIN wIn win!!!
There is a general waiver for agricultural workers that may be employed legally without identification (click here).
Federal law prohibits deportation based on lack of papers because some immigrant are not required to carry papers.
The preferred method used by the federal government is fingerprinting, which can take longer than the 48 hour limit unless you have a fingerprint machine with Internet connectivity in every police car.
Ergo.
Police must chauffeur Mexicans around town before releasing them.
Win?
You can't just pass a law blindly.
No.
Wait.
Yes you can.
Come, While the majority of the law was upheld, Obama has already provided direction to DHS not to respond to calls for immigration services from Arizona. I hope Arizona keeps up the pressure. I personally would initiate an aggressive program to identify Illegal Immigrants and would include an extensive Ad campaign telling Illegal Immigrants that the list is being maintained and deportation will be immediate and massive, once authority is obtained.
hey 2ez4u....yeah, i saw that...unreal...an hour after the USSC rules, Obama pulls an end around...what do you want to bet he tries to do the same thing on Thursday when Health Care is ruled unconsititutional??? "Thanks Congress, thanks USSC, I'll do what I want anyways"...
Bewildered.
Crackhead, Police must chauffeur Mexicans around town before releasing them. It appears you think that being Mexican is a qualifying factor of an Illegal Immigrant. Seems find of racists. There are Illegal Immigrants from every Nation, not just Mexico. You have to stop Profiling.
This issue is far from over. Here we have another example where a state legislature writes an exceptionally poorly written law that leaves far too many vague issues. In the end, this effort by Arizona conservatives will cost a great deal of money and waste even more time. They should have tried getting it right in the first place.
Maybe Arizona would be better off paying more attention to job creation and providing services to the population, than, playing politics with games to restrict rights.
maybe the Federal government should start enforcing the laws on the books, and get over this "suspension of deportations", and do their damn jobs, like they are supposed to, so states don't HAVE to take efforts to protect themselves!!!
have to go there catt....wouldn't be great if the teapubs put federal laws first rather than their priority being Obama first. would be refreshing huh? yep doin their damn jobs would be somethin...........
Here is the law.
Any foreign citizen can enter the US for a period of 90 days (tourist visa). Longer with a note from a physician, university acceptance, or citizen spouse.
It is legal for immigrants to apply for work while in the US on a tourist visa. They must apply to DHS 30 days before applying for work. There is a general waiver for agricultural workers that may be employed without identification (no papers).
Employers are required to document all foreign workers using form I-129 after no US citizens apply after adverting a job for 30 days (click here).
Immigrants become undocumented when employers refuse to pay the fee.
"Illegal immigrants" are a fabrication created by news organizations populated by uneducated journalists.
The correct term is "illegal employer".
It is a treaty violation to deport from certain states. Arizona is one of those areas.
Obama is actively involved with the enforcement of every provision, including those required by international treaty.
ahhh the old employer is hiring illegals.................
hey, go after the employers as well...I am all for that. they shouldn't be hiring illegal ALIENS (you are right- they aren't illegal immigrants- they are illegal aliens). go after the people AND the companies.
Go after ONLY the employers.
The immigrants are not illegal according to US law. Undocumented maybe. Not illegal.
Think about it.
If a child is born outside a hospital in the US, the child is literally undocumented AND a US citizen.
Federal law recognizes thing like that.
People that are undocumented cannot be called illegal. Human beings that have broken no laws are not illegal.
And the people who cross into the united sates without going through the legal process of crossing through a border control agency checkpoint are called what? Is that not entering the country illegally?
Once again...crickets....
surprise surprise
The country needs to have comprehensive immigration reform. The 12 million undocumented workers are here because we all want cheap vegetables, meat products, food, construction workers, and a whole range of other services. Its not an accident that 12 million do all of our dirty work and the rest of us are too cheap to pay them a living wage. What is worse is we often discriminate against these people. We love their cheap labor but wish to do little to help them provide an education for their children or to see that they all get health care. God forbid we treat 12 million undocumented workers and their families like human beings. The American way is to treat them like serfs.
The ancient Egyptians built pyramids for their pharaohs, so he could permanently look down upon his slaves in the after life. The medieval lord looked down on the serfs from his castle as they tilled his fields. The Wall Street capitalist looks down upon his workers in the corporation or toiling in the factory floor from his skyscraper. All of these elites felt they were above the law and above the rest of society that built their perches that they sat on from their own toil, thought, and sweat. Its no different for these 11 million undocumented workers today. Will tomorrow be any different or will they just get replaced by a new group of serfs?
Duh.
Agree.
Except for the slave thing in Egypt.
Crystal you people are all too safe, boring, your're too vanilla. Why don't you dump C Cup and get people on like Marc Lamont Hill, Aisha Taylor, Hal Sparks, Lewis Black, John Oliver, Jason Jones, Aasif Mandvi or Kristen Schaal.
Another producer.
By upholding Arizona's law to stop brown-skinned persons for documentation of proof has immorally and unjustly approved the national discriminatory mentality of hatred. Does a Black person also has to show proof of citizenship and if he/she can not show proof, do they get deported? The Supreme Court has given me or any other person the right to ask for proof of citizenship of any Whites and if they can not show their citizenship, then send them back to Europe.
I think that the police should be able to determine if a person is an illegal alien. If they are here illegally they should be escorted to the border. No big deal.
We have immigration laws we don't need a whole new set.
I would be confident in my opinion to state that most HISPANICS, as well Mexican Citizens; agree with the Majority Supreme Courts decision, on Immigration; today!
-- Joseph