Thread: Arizona immigration law faces 1st court hearing today

Arizona immigration law faces 1st court hearing today

Jacques Billeaud -
Jul. 15, 2010 10:40 AM
Associated Press

A federal judge heard arguments on Thursday morning over whether Arizona's new immigration law should take effect at the end of the month, marking the first major hearing in one of seven challenges to the strict law.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also is considering 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.

Bolton began by quickly dismissing Brewer as an individual defendant to the lawsuit, a motion unopposed by Salgado's lawyer. She then began considering whether to dismiss the case.

Bolton said last week that she may not rule on the officer's request to block the law before it takes effect July 29.

Hearings on the six other lawsuits, including one filed by the federal government, are set for next week.

The large ceremonial courtroom at the main federal courthouse in Phoenix was packed with more than 100 spectators as the hearing began. More than a dozen lawyers were in place along two L-shaped tables, evenly divided between each side. The jury box was filled with law clerks for judges who work in the building who came to observe.

Protesters and supporters of the law gathered outside the courthouse amid heavy security.

About two dozen supporters of the law, many dressed in red, white and blue, held up signs praising Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a major backer of the crackdown on illegal immigrants, and one said "American Pride."

About 50 feet away a group opposed to the law held up signs calling for repeal of the law.

The groups competed with each other using bullhorns.

"We demand an injunction. We demand a federal intervention," opponent Sandra Castro of Phoenix, 22, yelled into a bullhorn.

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.

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 Bgned the measure into law 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 an officer to use race as a primary factor in enforcing the law and because the state law is trumped by 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 state law prohibits racial profiling and that it isn't trumped by federal immigration law 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 plans to hold similar hearings July 22 in the lawsuits filed by the federal government and civil rights groups.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/ ... 15-ON.html

Phx. cop's challenge to immigration law gets a hearing today

Howard Fischer Capitol Media Services
July 15, 2010 12:00 am

PHOENIX - Foes of Arizona's tough new immigration law will get their first chance today to try to block its enforcement.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton will hear arguments by attorneys for Phoenix police Officer David Salgado, who wants her to put the law on "hold" while she considers its legality.

Salgado said his rights are violated by a requirement in SB 1070 for him to ask those he has stopped about their immigration status when there is "reasonable suspicion" they are in this country illegally.

Salgado said another section of the law puts him at risk of being sued if he doesn't enforce the law "to the fullest extent permitted by federal immigration law." Salgado said he does not intend to question those he has stopped because he believes he does not have the legal authority.

On a related front, two more Latin American countries filed their own objections Tuesday to Arizona's new immigration law. Argentina and Ecuador have filed briefs in connection with the challenge brought by attorneys for three civil-rights organizations. Mexico previously filed to intervene in the case.

Today's hearing comes a week before Bolton hears two other requests to keep the law from taking effect as scheduled on July 29 - the one filed by the three civil-rights groups and one by the U.S. Department of Justice.

The briefs filed by Mexico, Argentina and Ecuador are part of a list of state, national and international interests wanting a say in the cases, including:

• Michigan and eight other states, along with the Northern Mariana Islands, have submitted a brief in support of SB 1070. Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Arizona represents "a lot of states," emphasizing that it was only Monday that he asked other state attorneys general to join him.

• The Tohono O'odham Nation filed in opposition to the law. Jonathan Jantzen, the nation's attorney general, said tribal members are "likely to be the victims of civil rights violations" by state law enforcement officers who are not properly trained in immigration laws. The tribe's reservation shares 75 miles of its border with Mexico.

• Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, who crafted the measure, filed a motion along with others saying that, even if some provisions are unconstitutional, which he does not concede, Judge Bolton should not invalidate the entire statute.

• The Arizona Attorneys for Criminal Justice, an organization of lawyers who represent criminal defendants, said SB 1070 is unconstitutional because it effectively makes it a crime for people who are stopped to refuse to answer police questions and produce identification. "Mere inability to prove one's lawful presence cannot rise to the level of reasonable suspicion to believe the person is in the country illegally."

• American Unity Legal Defense Fund, a national group that intervenes in immigration cases, said states can target illegal immigration, even if their actions go beyond federal law, as long as they are "consistent with the objectives Congress established," and Congress has not pre-empted the kind of things in SB 1070.

The Department of Justice challenge is based on the argument that SB 1070 impermissibly interferes with the exclusive right of the federal government to regulate immigration.

Officer Salgado's legal objections are more focused on how they will affect him personally. His lawyers say only police with specialized federal training can enforce federal immigration law - training Salgado does not have.

"If he refuses to enforce the act, he can be disciplined by his employer or subjected to costly private enforcement actions under the act," the lawsuit says. "Conversely, if he enforces the act, he can be subjected to costly civil actions alleging the deprivation of civil rights of the individual against whom he enforces the act."

Attorneys for Gov. Jan Brewer said simply inquiring of individuals about their immigration status can't violate someone's rights. They pointed out that SB 1070 requires someone to have been stopped, detained or arrested for some other reason before that inquiry can take place.

Legal papers filed by Luis Gallegos, the ambassador to the United States from Ecuador, said, "Similar to Mexico, Ecuador has a substantial and compelling interest in ensuring that its bilateral diplomatic relations with the government of the United States of America are transparent, consistent and reliable, and not frustrated by the actions of individual U.S. states."

He wrote SB 1070 "raises substantial challenges'' to relations between the two countries, as well as raising grave concerns the law will lead to racial profiling and disparate treatment of citizens of Ecuador who are in the U.S. legally.

A virtually identical brief was filed Tuesday by José Perez Gabilondo, chargé d'affaires in Washington for Argentina.

Brewer said that both diplomats are wrong, both on the issue of racial profiling and the question of Arizona's interfering with international relations. She said both objections ignore the issues and problems of illegal immigration.

"The bottom line is America and Arizona live by laws," she said. Brewer said SB 1070 mirrors federal immigration laws, giving state and local police tools to enforce them.

"We will continue to live by those laws," she said.

On StarNet: Find extensive coverage of immigration issues at azstarnet.com/news/local/border

http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/ ... 5af0c.html

Looks like she might be trying to make a ruling before the 29th.

This is bogus

She should have thrown this out TODAY

RELATED

Ariz. immigration law hearing ends with no ruling

http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-205921.html

No ruling is better than the wrong ruling.