Thread: Civil rights groups ask court to block immigration law

Civil rights groups ask court to block immigration law

by Dustin Gardiner -
Jun. 5, 2010 09:52 AM
The Arizona Republic

A group of civil rights organizations is asking a federal court to block the implementation of Arizona's hot-button immigration law until it rules on the law's constitutionality.

The law, SB1070, which goes into effect July 29, makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.

Groups behind a lawsuit challenging SB1070 say it would promote racial profiling of Latinos and violates numerous parts of the Constitution, including the First and Fourth amendments.

In a filing entered in U.S. District Court on Friday, the coalition argues that delaying implementation of the law would discourage other states from enacting similar "piecemeal and inconsistent immigration standards" until the court can make a ruling.

"The proponents of nearly a dozen 'copycat' laws are waiting for the outcome of this litigation to decide whether to propose their own immigration enforcement schemes," the motion states.

Lawmakers in Idaho, Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, Utah and Minnesota have discussed pursuing similar legislation.

Arizona's law states that a police officer engaged in a lawful stop, detention or arrest shall, when practicable, ask about a person's legal status if reasonable suspicion exists that the person is in the U.S. illegally.

Participants in the lawsuit include the American Civil Liberties Union, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Immigration Law Center and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Their case is one of at least five challenging the law.

Other lawsuits have been filed by the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders; Tucson Officer Martin Escobar; Phoenix Officer David Salgado; and Roberto Javier Frisancho, a naturalized citizen and Washington, D.C., resident who is planning to visit the state for research on an 1997 illegal immigration roundup in Chandler.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/ ... ck-ON.html

The Court CAN NOT block our sovereignty as a nation. Unacceptable outcome for alot of people here....woo

Originally Posted by Tbow009

The Court CAN NOT block our sovereignty as a nation. Unacceptable outcome for alot of people here....woo

The courts blocked California's Prop 187 in 1994

and they are going to do the same thing now.

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Originally Posted by Tbow009

The Court CAN NOT block our sovereignty as a nation. Unacceptable outcome for alot of people here....woo

The courts blocked California's Prop 187 in 1994

and they are going to do the same thing now.

Can the courts really block this law? Beucase if so wouldnt that mean that this country's system of goverrning has completely failed?

I thought that 187 was blocked beucase it was written incorrectly... ?

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Originally Posted by Tbow009

The Court CAN NOT block our sovereignty as a nation. Unacceptable outcome for alot of people here....woo

The courts blocked California's Prop 187 in 1994

and they are going to do the same thing now.

We need to file some amicus curiae briefs. The leftwing lawsuit industry is professional at this, and once they gain complete control of the courts they know the whole country will be led by a nose-ring.




Here is an example of what they are doing right now:
Amicus Brief Sign On – SB1070
May 29th, 2010

Call for Organizations to Join Amicus Curiae Brief To Highlight the Impact of Arizona Law SB 1070 on Immigrant Women and Immigrant Victims of Violence Against Women
Sign on deadline: June 4, 2010

Dear Colleagues,
We are writing to seek your organization’s support in joining us in signing on to an amicus curiae brief in connection with litigation recently filed in Arizona federal court by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) , MALDEF (the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund), the National Immigration Law Center and the Asian Pacific American Legal Resource Center. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate Arizona’s new immigration law, SB 1070. This Amicus Brief will highlight how SB 1070 disproportionately impacts immigrant women by undermining their legal rights as crime victims to access protections under U.S. criminal and immigration laws; as an especially vulnerable population to access services necessary to protect life and safety that Congress intended to assist them; and as mothers to nurture, care for and maintain custody of their children.

The attached call for organizations to join as amici highlights what will be covered in this amicus brief.

We are working with the law firm of Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP to draft and file the brief. To sign on to the brief, please send your organization’s name and a short, one-paragraph statement of interest to Joanna McCallum at jmccallum@manatt.com. The paragraph should describe your organization, its goals/missions, and why the organization or its clients are impacted by the effect of SB 1070 on immigrant women.

If you have questions please contact Soraya Fata or Leslye Orloff at (202) 326-0040 or iwp@legalmomentum.org

The deadline for sign-ons is Friday June 4, 2010.

Thank you in advance for joining us in this important effort.
Leslye E. Orloff
Vice President and Director, Immigrant Women Program,
Legal Momentum
1101 14th Street N.W., Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20005
(202) 326-0041 / (202) 326-0048 (Assistant Pari Farmani)
(202) 210-8886 (cell) / (202) 589-0511 (fax)
lorloff@legalmomentum.org / pfarmani@legalmomentum.org
Founded in 1970, Legal Momentum is the nation’s oldest legal defense and education fund dedicated to advancing the rights of all women and girls.

Originally Posted by WindowsForEver

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Originally Posted by Tbow009

The Court CAN NOT block our sovereignty as a nation. Unacceptable outcome for alot of people here....woo

The courts blocked California's Prop 187 in 1994

and they are going to do the same thing now.

Can the courts really block this law? Beucase if so wouldnt that mean that this country's system of goverrning has completely failed?

I thought that 187 was blocked beucase it was written incorrectly... ?

A judge blocked it before it was even enacted. It would have cost the CA. taxpayers millions to defend it in court and the new Democrat governor wouldn't defend it in court because he didn't want it upheld. It never got a Supreme Court hearing.

California Proposition 187 (1994) -

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

California Proposition 187 (also known as the Save Our State (SOS) initiative) was a 1994 ballot initiative designed to create a state-run citizenship ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California ... _187_(1994)

There could be differences, John Doe.

Some questions I have:
1.What standing do these groups have, at least until they find someone who is impacted by the Arizona law?
2. There are thousands of state laws which have been passed that have survived legal challenges.
3. The state law is less stringent than the federal law, and the federal law has not been struck down
4. States are forbidden by Supreme Court doctrines from passing laws that contradict federal immigration policy. We know the federal policy is still to deport illegal aliens.

Prop 187 was way different than SB1070, 187 would have ended public education for illegal children even though the Supreme Court had already ruled they were entitled to a public education. This made it an easy target for certain blockage.

If a judge blocks 1070 it can't be enacted until it works it's way through the courts, which will take years.
Years from now if it is upheld by the Supreme Court it will still have been blocked for all of those years.
I'm not saying it's right. That's just how it is.