Results 1 to 2 of 2
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
-
06-14-2005, 09:02 AM #1
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Location
- Oak Island, North Mexolina
- Posts
- 6,231
Court unlikely to overturn Arizona illegal immigration law
Court unlikely to overturn Arizona illegal immigration law
By DAVID KRAVETS, AP Legal Affairs Writer
Tuesday, June 14, 2005
(06-14) 00:10 PDT San Francisco (AP) --
A federal appeals court was urged to overturn a voter approved Arizona law denying welfare and other benefits to illegal immigrants.
A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, however, appeared inclined Monday to leave intact the nation's only such law requiring state and local welfare workers to report suspected illegal immigrants to immigration officials.
Lawyers for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund argued that the law was a "scheme" to deport illegal immigrants, and therefore must be nullified because only Congress can adopt immigration laws. "The state has no authority to enact it," MALDEF lawyer Hector Villagra said of Arizona's Proposition 200.
The measure, the only one of its kind in the nation, passed with 56 percent of the vote in a state with porous borders along Mexico. Arizona, the busiest illegal entry point on the country's southern border, spends millions of dollars annually on social services for illegal immigrants.
The passage of the law emboldened Arizona legislators to propose other anti-immigration bills. Gov. Janet Napolitano vetoed a number of them, including one that would have given local police the power to enforce federal immigration laws.
Arizona Deputy Attorney General Mary O'Grady urged the court not to tinker with the law that denies monthly general assistance payments, assistance in paying utility bills, and help with vision benefits.
She told the judges that the law is not pre-empted by Congress because it does not dictate who can enter the U.S. lawfully.
"This isn't a regulation of immigration," she said. "We are simply verifying eligibility."
Two judges appeared to question why MALDEF was even in court. They noted that the main plaintiff in the case was a private social service organization, Friendly House, and was not a person denied benefits or deported.
Judge Alfred Goodwin suggested that the courts cannot intervene until somebody is denied benefits and sues, an assertion backed by Judge Johnnie Rawlinson.
"Suppose it is a mean-spirited, foolish law," Goodwin asked. "Until somebody is injured in fact by it, courts don't go around deciding these foolish laws unconstitutional."
Villagra, of MALDEF, said Friendly House was being injured because it was besieged by illegal immigrants too afraid to seek government assistance. Since the passage of Proposition 200 in November, he added, illegal immigrants are less frequently using emergency room services and baby delivery services â€â€Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)
-
06-14-2005, 09:11 AM #2
Well, lets pray that the 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals today has their finger to the wind and can feel US!!
GO ARIZONA! GO PROP 200!
Friendly House: I have a suggestion for you. Why don't you relocate to SOUTH OF THE BORDER and take all your flood of clients with you and your lawyers, too!!
Adios MALDEF!!
A Nation Without Borders Is Not A Nation - Ronald Reagan
Save America, Deport Congress! - Judy
Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at https://eepurl.com/cktGTn
Exclusive – Sen. Marsha Blackburn at Border: ‘Walls Work,’ Need...
03-28-2024, 09:54 PM in illegal immigration News Stories & Reports