Thread: Judge to hear lawsuit vs. Arizona's immigration law

Judge to hear lawsuit vs. Arizona's immigration law

1 comment
by Alia Beard Rau - Jul. 15, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

Arizona's new immigration law will get its first day in court today.

U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton will hear a motion to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Phoenix police Officer David Salgado as well as a motion to prevent Senate Bill 1070 from going into effect July 29.

Salgado's lawsuit is one of seven filed by various individuals and groups challenging the immigration law. His claim alleges that, among other things, SB 1070 would require him to use race as a primary factor in enforcing the law and thus would force him to violate the rights of Latinos. It also claims that the state law is preempted by federal law.

Stephen Montoya, Salgado's attorney, said the preemption argument will be key to their case. He said the law violates four acts of Congress that limit the authority of state and local law-enforcement officers to enforce federal law.

"I know the people of Arizona, through the Legislature, passed 1070 and I respect that, but I'm an American first and an Arizonan second. We all have to be," Montoya said. "The state of Arizona cannot preempt federal law, whether that's federal patent law, federal tax law, federal drug law or federal immigration law."

Chicanos Por La Causa has joined Salgado in the lawsuit, claiming that the children who participate in its programs would be subject to unlawful interrogation and arrest if they couldn't quickly prove their legal status.

The attorneys defending SB 1070 on behalf of Gov. Jan Brewer have filed motions stating that the state law is not preempted by federal law and that both Chicanos Por La Causa and Salgado's concerns are speculative instead of imminent. They have asked the judge to dismiss Salgado's lawsuit.

In today's hearing, each side will have 20 minutes to argue for or against Brewer's motion to dismiss the case, and then Brewer's attorney will have time for a rebuttal.

Paul Senseman, Brewer's spokesman, said the governor's attorneys will argue that the plaintiffs "have failed to allege any real threat of harm from enforcement of the SB 1070 and simply express only abstract outrage about the law as well as pure speculation about potential future harm."

He said the allegations the plaintiffs have made reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of SB 1070.

Each side also will get 30 minutes to argue for or against Salgado's motion for a preliminary injunction, with Salgado's attorney getting additional time for rebuttal. A preliminary injunction would keep SB 1070 from going into effect until the court has a chance to hear the full case.

The judge could issue a ruling on the two motions immediately or could wait and issue a ruling later.

Similar hearings are scheduled before Bolton on July 22. In the morning, she is scheduled to hear arguments in the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and several other groups. In the afternoon, she will hear arguments in the suit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice.

The law makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally. It states that an officer engaged in a lawful stop, detention or arrest shall, when practicable, ask about a person's legal status when reasonable suspicion exists that the person is in the U.S. illegally.

Also, on Wednesday, the conservative Washington, D.C.-based educational foundation Judicial Watch filed a motion to intervene on behalf of SB 1070 sponsor Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, in the U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit.

The motion states that "as the author and driving force behind the enactment of SB 1070, Senator Pearce has the right to defend it."

In a news statement, Pearce called the fight over the law "a legal battle of epic proportions."

"What happens here in Arizona will impact every state in the country interested in protecting its citizens by enforcing the rule of law," Pearce said.

www.azcentral.com

Added to Homepage:
http://www.alipac.us/article-5464--0-0.html

What is your gut feeling on this judge?

Oh, to be a bug on the wall in her chambers (and late night phone calls at home) when she teleconferences with the amnesty crowd.

Her job is not in jeopardy, so that is not an issue on how she will rule.

Liberal Professional political pressure to rule against SB1070 is likely very heavy on her mind.

It is great though to see other governors now publicly leaning towards their own versions of SB1070.

That cop that sued needs to be removed from office for treason!

ENFORCE THE LAW. DEPORT ALL ILLLEGAL ALIENS NOW.

Originally Posted by jean

Chicanos Por La Causa has joined Salgado in the lawsuit, claiming that the children who participate in its programs would be subject to unlawful interrogation and arrest if they couldn't quickly prove their legal status.

Good try, but they only need to worry IF they break a law, or make themselves seem suspect of having broken a law, other than illegal entry. As long as your day laborers behave they can't be touched by this law as written.


I love how pretty much every argument against this law that I have seen is based on the propagandist threat that an individual can be detained and questioned on their immigration/citizenship status anytime, anywhere, and without provocation... and that will only happen if someone appears to be of Latin American descent.

Whatever. Literacy for the win. Read the law for yourselves instead of letting someone else tell you what they want you to believe it says, people, you might learn something.

Argument busted, go home (be it legally here or legally abroad) and leave the judge alone to do their job.

I'm sick to death of hearing this "racial profiling" rant. What do you think cops do when they hear the report over the radio to look for a 7 foot orange male with purple hair who just robbed the local convenience store? Would they be looking for a rogue elephant? I mean, really??!! If you have broken the law, you should be afraid of getting caught. You can't move heaven and earth and yell and scream about your "rights" because you have no "rights" to break the law!

I also don't understand why they are beating the drum that "latino" is a race. It isn't. It is an ethnicity, just like German, Dutch, or others. If you want to win an argument, at least have a valid point.

All the lawsuits filed for profiling have to get thrown out , they have no standing since the law isn't even in effect ,

Pre emption also gets the boot , local cops enforce federal laws every day in the case of kidnapping , firearms , banking ,=drugs , etc

All federal laws

To argue that only the feds can go after immigration violators would also say that only the feds can go after a bank robber , or a kidnapper , or a drug dealer

Originally Posted by Justthefacts

Pre emption also gets the boot , local cops enforce federal laws every day in the case of kidnapping , firearms , banking ,=drugs , etc

To argue that only the feds can go after immigration violators would also say that only the feds can go after a bank robber , or a kidnapper , or a drug dealer

=========================================

This is reality. These truths are just too obvious.

If this does go to the USSC, all the other states who already have similar laws to AZ SB1070 will go up with it.

USA TODAY

Immigration law to get first major court hearing

PHOENIX (AP) — A federal judge is scheduled to hear arguments Thursday over whether Arizona's new immigration law should take effect later this month, marking the first major hearing in one of seven challenges to the strict law.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also will consider arguments over Gov. Jan Brewer's request to dismiss the challenge filed by Phoenix police Officer David Salgado and the statewide nonprofit group Chicanos Por La Causa.

The judge said last week she wasn't making any promises on whether she will rule on the officer's request to block enforcement of the law before it takes effect July 29.

The law requires police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person's immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally. It also makes it a state crime for immigrants to not carry immigration documents.

Supporters say the law was needed because the federal government hasn't adequately confronted illegal immigration in Arizona, the busiest illegal gateway for immigrants into the United States. Opponents say the law would lead to racial profiling and distract from police officers' traditional roles in combating crimes in their communities.

Since Brewer signed the measure into law on April 23, it has inspired rallies in Arizona and elsewhere by advocates on both sides of the immigration debate. Some opponents have advocated a tourism boycott of Arizona.

It also led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave Arizona for other American states or their home countries and prompted the Obama administration to file a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the law.

Salgado's attorneys argue the judge should block the law before it takes effect because it would require the officer to use race as a primary factor in enforcing the law and because the state law is trumped by federal immigration law.

His lawyers also say the Phoenix Police Department is planning to enforce the new law, even though federal authorities haven't authorized all Phoenix officers to enforce federal immigration law.

Attorneys for Brewer asked that the officer's lawsuit be thrown out because Salgado doesn't allege a real threat of harm from enforcing the new law and instead bases his claim on speculation. They also said the law prohibits racial profiling and that it isn't trumped by federal immigration because it doesn't attempt to regulate the conditions under which people can enter and leave the country.

The other challenges to the law were filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, civil rights organizations, clergy groups, a researcher from Washington and a Tucson police officer.

Bolton will hold similar hearings on July 22 in the lawsuits filed by the federal government and civil rights groups.
---------------------------------------------
Post comment @

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/201 ... ring_N.htm