Court hearing planned for Utah's immigration law
winonadailynews.com
Associated Press
Posted: Friday, February 17, 2012 9:06 am
Eight months after Utah's immigration enforcement law was put on hold by a federal judge, attorneys on both sides will have an opportunity on Friday to argue the constitutionality of the measure.
The law created by House Bill 497 would have allowed police to check the citizenship of anybody they arrest. It was initially blocked last May by U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups, 14 hours after it went into effect. At the time, Waddoups pointed at similarities to a contentious Arizona law that is bound for the U.S. Supreme Court and said there was sufficient evidence that at least some parts of the Utah law would be found unconstitutional.
The American Civil Liberties Union and National Immigration Law Center sued a week before the law went into effect to stop the implementation of House Bill 497, saying it could lead to racial profiling. The U.S. Justice Department joined the lawsuit in November, claiming the measure usurped federal authority.
Lawyers for the Utah attorney general's office have maintained the law is constitutional because it doesn't allow police to check the citizenship of everyone they encounter. They argue lawmakers worked to avoid the constitutional pitfalls of the Arizona law and passed a significantly different bill.
The Utah law, signed in March by Republican Gov. Gary Herbert, would require police to check the citizenship status of anyone arrested on suspicion of a felony or class-A misdemeanor, while giving officers discretion to check the citizenship of those stopped for traffic infractions and other lesser offences. Class A misdemeanors include theft, negligent homicide and criminal mischief, while felonies range from aggravated burglary to rape and murder.
Herbert has maintained the law will eventually be found constitutional.
Utah lawmakers passed a package of immigration bills last year, including HB 497 and another bill that will allow illegal immigrants to live and work in the state if they haven't committed other crimes, have steady employment and pay taxes. That law takes effect in 2013 and the state is working with federal officials in an attempt to secure a waiver.
___
Josh Loftin can be reached at Josh Loftin (@joshloftin) on Twitter
Read more: Court hearing planned for Utah's immigration law
Utah Immigration Laws Must Be Blocked, U.S. Tell Judge
bloomberg.com
By Andrew Harris and Shelley Osterloh -
Feb 17, 2012 10:54 AM ET
A Utah law requiring police to verify the immigration status of people arrested on felony charges violates the American Constitution and must be blocked, the U.S. Justice Department said.
That measure was included in a package of four bills signed into law last year by Governor Gary R. Herbert as parts of a legislative package he then called “the Utah solution” to illegal immigration issues.
Justice Department lawyers in a hearing today are asking U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups in Salt Lake City for an order temporarily blocking the status verification law and two other statutes they say conflict with the constitutional powers of the federal government.
“In our constitutional system, the power to regulate immigration is exclusively vested in the federal government,” the U.S. argued in court papers. “The state of Utah has crossed this constitutional line.”
Attorneys for the federal government are also asking Waddoups to block enforcement of measures authorizing police to arrest without a warrant people they believe are subject to the removal order of an immigration judge and making it a felony to encourage or induce an illegal alien to enter or settle in Utah.
Civil Rights
The U.S. filed its lawsuit in November, six months after a legal challenge was first lodged by a Latino civil rights advocacy group, Utah Coalition of La Raza. Waddoups ordered the two cases consolidated a week later.
Lawyers for the state argue the U.S. is mischaracterizing the legislation known as HB 497 and say it’s consistent with congressional mandates and constitutional.
“This issue is neither difficult nor complicated,” the state’s attorneys told Waddoups in a Jan. 17 submission.
“There are those who will say these bills may not be perfect, but they are a step in the right direction and they are better than what we had,” Herbert said in a statement after signing the legislation on May 15.
His act and immigration laws enacted by the governors of Arizona, Alabama and South Carolina have all been challenged by the U.S. government.
The U.S. Supreme Court in December said it would review a San Francisco-based federal appeals court’s 2011 ruling that barred enforcement of an Arizona law requiring police to check immigration status when they stop or arrest a person they have reasonable suspicion to believe is in the country illegally.
Common Border
While Utah and Arizona share a common border, the states lie in different federal appellate court regions.
An Atlanta-based appeals court on March 1 will hear argument on state and federal government challenges to a Sept. 28 ruling by U.S. District Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn in Birmingham, Alabama, blocking parts of package of immigration control measures signed into law by Governor Robert Bentley.
A federal judge in South Carolina, Richard M. Gergel, in December blocked enforcement of a law in that state which would require police officers suspecting somebody of unlawfully being in the U.S. to check their legal status.
South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley’s administration is appealing Gergel’s decision to the regional U.S. Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia.
Empowered States
Congress has empowered the states to communicate and cooperate with one another and with the federal government on immigration enforcement efforts, Utah’s attorneys said in court papers arguing the U.S. bid for injunctive relief should be denied.
“HB 497 reflects Utah’s attempt to undertake its supporting role in the fight against illegal immigration, within the parameters set by Congress,” Utah’s lawyers have told Widdoups. “HB 497 does not conflict with Congress’ mandate, but is entirely consistent with it.”
The case is Utah Coalition of La Raza v. Herbert, 11-401, U.S. District Court, District of Utah (Salt Lake City).
To contact the reporters on this story: Andrew Harris in Chicago at aharris16@bloomberg.net; Shelley Osterloh in Salt Lake City at Shelley.osterloh@gmail.com.
Utah Immigration Laws Must Be Blocked, U.S. Tell Judge - Bloomberg