Thread: BREAKING: Supreme Court upholds Ariz. law punishing employer

BREAKING: Supreme Court upholds Ariz. law punishing employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants

Thursday, May 26, 2011 9:44

Supreme Court upholds Ariz. law punishing employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants

Smaller Text Larger Text Text Size
Print
E-mail
Reprints


By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, May 26, 9:21 AM

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona’s law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Wednesday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

The decision upholding the validity of the 2007 law comes as the state is appealing a ruling that blocked key components of a second, more controversial Arizona immigration enforcement law.


http://beforeitsnews.com

It only makes sense when the latest unemployment figure shows 429,000 more filed for unemployment. With the additional losses of thousands of businesses because of floods and tornadoes no one illegally in this country should ever be employed while millions of Americans are going without. Are you listening Mr Obama (I can't call him president because a president represents and serves Americans, NOT illegal aliens). While espousing your phony baloney concern for unemployed Americans you want to dramatically increase the numbers of H and L cheap labor visas and grant amnesty to millions illegally here who will bring in millions more immediate and extended family members through chain migration, all competing with Americans for few available jobs. You sue states trying to enforce the 1986 IRCA and it's 5 revisions to protect Americans from the evils of unchecked illegal immigration. You turn a blind eye to unemployed Americans affected by open borders by dramatically reducing work site enforcement. You endanger American lives by supporting sanctuary cities resulting in the deaths of innocent Americans. Once again Mr Obama your opposition to common sense solutions shows whose side you really are on and unfortunately it isn't with Americans.
I am willing to bet that one of three dissenters is Sonya Sotomayor, the Reconquista Queen.

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court has backed an Arizona law that punishes businesses hiring illegal aliens, a law that opponents, including the Obama administration, say steps on traditional federal oversight over immigration matters.

The 5-3 ruling Thursday is a victory for supporters of immigration reform.

It was the first high court challenge to a variety of recent state laws cracking down on illegal immigrants, an issue that has become a political lightning rod.

The outcome could serve as a judicial warm-up for a separate high-profile challenge to a more controversial Arizona immigration reform law working its way through lower courts. That statute would, among other things, give local police a greater role in arresting suspected illegal immigrants.

The hiring case turned on whether state law tramples on federal authority.

"Arizona has taken the route least likely to cause tension with federal law," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts. "It relies solely on the federal government's own determination of who is an unauthorized alien, and it requires Arizona employers to use the federal government's own system for checking employee status."
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/26/scotus ... index.html

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Immigration Law

Katie Pavlich
Townhall.com

In a 5-3 decision, the Supreme Court has upheld the Legal Arizona Worker's Act, passed in 2007, that allows the state of Arizona to punish employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. The "controversial" law was opposed by the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona's law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Wednesday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

This ruling sets positive precedent for SB 1070 as the Supreme Court rejected arguments in the ruling that states have no role in immigration policy. A win for Arizona and numerous other states like Georgia, Utah, North Carolina, South Carolina, Nebraska and more who have taken the illegal immigration issue into their own hands due to the failure of the federal government to enforce immigration laws.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavli ... ration_law

Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Law Penalizing Businesses For Hiring Illegal Immigrants

In a 5-3 decision upholding an Arizona immigration law, justices rule that states can take away the business licenses of companies that knowingly hire illegal workers.

By David G. Savage, Washington Bureau

May 26, 2011, 7:42 a.m.
The Supreme Court, giving states more authority to crack down on illegal immigrants, upholds an Arizona law that punishes employers who hire illegal workers.

In a 5-3 decision, the court said federal law permits states to take away the business licenses of companies that knowingly hire illegal workers.

Arizona also won the authority to require employers to use the federal E-Verify system to check on the immigration status of new workers.

The ruling is a defeat for both the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Obama administration which opposed the Arizona law.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 0104.story

One article from above added to Homepage--

http://www.alipac.us/article-6315--0-0.html

The Supreme Court! Needed something like this, was starting to lose faith in our judicial system.

ALL RIGHT!

Finally some judges with common sense...

High Court Upholds Arizona Law Penalizing Employers Over Illegal Immigrant Workers


Published May 26, 2011


AP

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court has sustained Arizona's law that penalizes businesses for hiring workers who are in the United States illegally, rejecting arguments that states have no role in immigration matters.

By a 5-3 vote, the court said Thursday that federal immigration law gives states the authority to impose sanctions on employers who hire unauthorized workers.

The decision upholding the validity of the 2007 law comes as the state is appealing a ruling that blocked key components of a second, more controversial Arizona immigration enforcement law. Thursday's decision applies only to business licenses and does not signal how the high court might rule if the other law comes before it.

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for a majority made up of Republican-appointed justices, said the Arizona's employer sanctions law "falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states."

Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, all Democratic appointees, dissented. The fourth Democratic appointee, Justice Elena Kagan, did not participate in the case because she worked on it while serving as President Barack Obama's solicitor general
Breyer said the Arizona law upsets a balance in federal law between dissuading employers from hiring illegal workers and ensuring that people are not discriminated against because they may speak with an accent or look like they might be immigrants.




Employers "will hesitate to hire those they fear will turn out to lack the right to work in the United States," he said.

Business interests and civil liberties groups challenged the law, backed by the Obama administration.

The measure was signed into law in 2007 by Democrat Janet Napolitano, then the governor of Arizona and now the administration's Homeland Security secretary.

The employer sanctions law has been only infrequently used. It was intended to diminish Arizona's role as the nation's hub for immigrant smuggling by requiring employers to verify the eligibility of new workers through a federal database. Employers found to have violated the law can have their business licenses suspended or revoked.

Lower courts, including the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, previously upheld the law.

The case is Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, 09-115.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/05 ... ixzz1NTNQX


Supreme Court affirms we are a nation of Laws