Thread: Rotten Tucson Citizen Editorial - When will they wake up?

Published: 08.01.2007
Our Opinion: Judge's ruling undermines Az laws on immigration
Tucson Citizen
letters@tucsoncitizen.com
A ruling by a federal judge in Pennsylvania last week should cool Arizona's fervor to enact laws seeking to crack down on illegal immigrants.
Among the laws that could run afoul of the ruling are recently enacted sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants and the sweeping provisions of Proposition 300, approved last year by voters.
The ruling by Judge James M. Munley of Federal District Court in the Middle District of Pennsylvania is a clear statement that fighting illegal immigration and determining who is in the country legally are powers reserved for the federal government.
Cities and states have no role.
At issue were ordinances passed a year ago by the Hazleton (Pa.) City Council. After a nine-day trial, Munley ruled that the ordinances interfered with federal laws that regulate immigration and violated the due process rights of employers, landlords and illegal immigrants.
Munley specifically criticized a city law that makes it illegal for companies to knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Violators' business licenses can be suspended.
It's strikingly similar to a new Arizona law that suspends business licenses for companies that knowingly hire an illegal immigrant, then revoke licenses for a second offense.
Munley ruled that business licenses can be suspended only after a firm has been found guilty in federal court of violating a federal law.
Munley said the Hazleton law meant that Pennsylvania courts were deciding whether a person is in the country legally. State courts "do not have jurisdiction over determinations of immigration status," he ruled.
The judge also noted in his 206-page ruling that illegal immigrants have the same civil rights as legal immigrants and citizens.
How does that square with
Prop. 300, approved by Arizona voters in November? The initiative makes adult education, subsidized child care and other state-funded services available only to U.S. citizens or those who are here legally.
Because the ruling came in a Pennsylvania district court, it sets no legal precedent in Arizona. But it will certainly be cited in legal challenges against Arizona's employer sanctions law and against other laws that deal with illegal immigrants.
It is frustrating that Congress has evaded its responsibility to deal with immigration reform - a failure that has encouraged numerous cities and states to act.
But one federal judge has said the federal government's failure is not a justification for local and state immigration laws. That's a warning Arizona lawmakers must heed.
Read another editorial: Three high schools tops in biotechnology.
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/opinion/58909.php

But one federal judge has said the federal government's failure is not a justification for local and state immigration laws. That's a warning Arizona lawmakers must heed.

Just because no police were there to protect you does not mean you have the right to defend yourself.

What a creep.

If the federal government is going to be the enforcer of illegal immigration so be it. That also means that the federal government should be sued by each state for breaking our constitution. That is what we hired them to uphold and to protect. I think we need to ask for film footage of all senators and congressmen, President and Vice President taking that oath and then sue them and throw them in prison. If that is what it is going to take for a State to survive what the federal government had caused then so be it. Sue the federal government.

Originally Posted by mapwife

The judge also noted in his 206-page ruling that illegal immigrants have the same civil rights as legal immigrants and citizens.

This judge has to go. How can it be possible that foreign criminals have the same rights as US Citizens?? It means our citizenship is basically worthless!!