Thread: Federal judge questions Ga. immigration law

When are we going to get a judge that Is not a political left wing hack ? Atlanta Business Chronicle - by Dave Williams , Staff Writer
Date: Monday, June 20, 2011, 12:27pm EDT An openly skeptical federal judge Monday grilled a lawyer for the state of Georgia at a hearing in a lawsuit challenging the immigration reform bill passed by the General Assembly.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash questioned the state’s purpose in enacting the legislation, whether a state can legally assert its authority over what traditionally has been a federal issue and how Georgians -- legal and illegal -- would be affected if the law is allowed to take effect July 1.

The bill, passed by the legislature in April and signed by Gov. Nathan Deal last month, authorizes local law enforcement officers to investigate the immigration status of people they suspect have committed a crime, including the right to demand a valid form of identification.

A coalition of civil rights groups is requesting a preliminary injunction to prohibit the law from taking effect while their underlying lawsuit makes its way through the court system.

The state is seeking dismissal of that request, which would let the legislation become law as scheduled.

During Monday’s hearing, Senior Assistant Attorney General Devon Orland said the law’s purpose is to save millions of taxpayer dollars the state is being forced to spend on health care for illegal immigrants who get sick and on jails for those who commit crimes.

She also argued that the new state law, rather than pre-empting federal law, will empower the state and local police agencies to help enforce immigration laws.

“The federal government cannot be everywhere,â€

The Federal Government has admitted that it can not enforce our immigration laws and that it can only deal with the most dangerous criminals (Only After committing heinous crimes against Americans)

That certainly leaves the right of states to assist in any way possible.

Related Thread Here
Opponents of GA's new immigration law asking for injunction
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-241275-georgia.html

"Judge questioned the state’s purpose in enacting the legislation".

What should be clear to everyone is that we have career politicians who have sold out the future of America. W hat do we have to show for our hard earned dollars that afforded this bunch a cushy lifestyle? Well, I will tell you:


• Georgia has a $3 billion budget deficit.
• Programs put in place for the retiring baby boomers are completely bankrupt because of the rush to pay for the illegals and their many, many, many, many children. This all the while we are encouraged at every avenue to cut back on the births of white western civilization.
• Generations of our youth have been lost to the huge volumes of drugs which flow freely across our borders to keep the corrupt Mexican government afloat. This action continues uninterrupted with the help of the Mexican government and their Military and the blessings of United States government.
• Property taxes increasing due to the huge numbers of schools built to accommodate the illegal criminals and the ever growing population of “anchor babiesâ€

MORE REASONS TO STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE:

The federal government already provides the H-2A Visa program to farmers that allow them to hire an unlimited number of temporary guest workers. It can be said that the truth is out. No more room for lies and excuses as to why elected officials have allowed cities in Georgia to become the epicenter of drug distribution to the world while ignoring the suffering of Georgia’s unemployed.

Drugs are being trucked into Georgia from Mexico unhampered…Giving the appearance to the world that Georgia’s government has collaborated with the corrupt Mexican government to allow Georgia to become the epicenter for drug distribution to the world.

Take the time to watch the below videos and listen to Katie Couric tell listeners that Georgia is no longer known for Peaches and Pecans or the home to Coca Cola. Listen to what Georgia is now known for:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpAsDwKj ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPMaEnNB ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tgYArJFb ... re=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mybopvLb ... re=related

Realize I have outlined only a small example of the problems caused by illegal immigration…now mentally factor in the one common thread; drugs and illegal immigration and attach a cost…then you can begin to get an idea of why the state’s recently mandated duties of educating, medicating, and incarcerating illegal invaders has left America a bankrupt nation.


The “Examinerâ€

US judge hears arguments on Ga. immigration law / Civil liberties groups argued Monday that Georgia's law cracking down on illegal immigration should not take effect until a lawsuit challenging it as unconstitutional is resolved, and a judge said he likely would rule on that request before the law takes effect.

The lawsuit asks a judge to find the law unconstitutional and to prevent its enforcement. U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash, who was appointed to the bench by former President Bill Clinton, also heard arguments from a lawyer for the state, who said the lawsuit should be dismissed. Thrash repeatedly questioned Senior Assistant Attorney General Devon Orland, with the exchange sometimes bordering on testy.

Omar Jadwat with the American Civil Liberties Union argued the law is fundamentally unconstitutional and infringes on federal authority, while Orland said the measure is needed because medical facilities and prisons are being strained by illegal immigrants.

The possible harm the law could inflict on people and organizations is greater than any harm done to the state without the law, so it should be blocked until the courts rule on the merits of the legal challenge, said Karen Tumlin from the National Immigration Law Center.

At the end of the hearing, Thrash said he needs more time to consider the arguments because the legal and constitutional issues at play are complex. He expects to decide on the issue before July 1, when most parts of the law take effect.

"We're optimistic," Jadwat said after the hearing. "The judge seemed to grasp a lot of the practical problems posed by this law."

The attorney general's office said it's waiting for the judge's ruling and declined to comment.

The measure authorizes law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of suspects who cannot provide identification and to detain and hand over to federal authorities anyone found to be in the country illegally. It also penalizes people who, while committing another crime, knowingly transport or harbor illegal immigrants and makes it a felony to present false documents or information when applying for a job.

During the hearing, Thrash on more than one occasion told Orland not to interrupt him and said she wasn't answering his questions.

The judge expressed concern that the new law allows individual jurisdictions too much discretion, effectively creating a different policy in every county. He also questioned the motive behind the law. Orland responded that it was to prevent the state from continuing to spend money on illegal immigrants.

"So they're supposed to go somewhere else with their husbands, their wives, their children, even though some of them may be U.S. citizens?" Thrash asked.

Thrash later questioned provisions dealing with people who harbor or transport illegal immigrants, raising a hypothetical scenario of an 18-year-old U.S. citizen who gets pulled over for speeding while driving his mother, an illegal immigrant, to the store.

"It would be no different if his mother had pockets full of cocaine and he was knowingly transporting her to go sell it," Orland said, later adding: "Sometimes the law is harsh. There is no question about that. That does not make it unconstitutional."

Orland also said that other parts of the law would actually protect illegal immigrants from exploitation, and that parts of the state policy mirror federal immigration law.

Jadwat argued that the state isn't mirroring federal law because the Georgia law gives local officers such broad enforcement discretion, and that the state is not authorized to enforce certain parts of federal law.

Georgia's law has provisions similar to those in laws enacted in Arizona, Utah and Indiana.

A federal judge blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's law last year after the U.S. Department of Justice sued, arguing that only the federal government can regulate immigration. A federal appeals court judge upheld the decision, and Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has said she plans to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

A federal judge also has temporarily blocked Utah's law, citing similarities to the most controversial parts of Arizona's law. A hearing is set for mid-July to determine if the law can take effect. And in Indiana, a federal judge on Monday heard arguments on whether that state's law can take effect next month. Like in Georgia, that judge listened to the arguments and said she'd rule before the law is set to take effect July 1.

Another section of the Georgia law set to be phased in starting in January will require many businesses to check the immigration status of new hires. A separate Arizona law with the same requirement was recently upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. http://www.laramieboomerang.com/article ... awsuit.txt

Opponents of Ga. immigration law seek injunction

10:54 PM, Jun 20, 2011

Written by
Jon Shirek

ATLANTA - A federal judge said he would rule before July 1 on a request to block enforcement of Georgia's new immigration law.

Lawyers who have filed a lawsuit asking Judge Thomas Thrash to throw out Georgia's new law argued for a temporary restraining order to stop enforcement of the law until the issue of the law's constitutionality can be resolved.

Opponents of the law claimed that it is "deeply flawed."

"Under this system, immigrants will be at constant risk of lengthy detention and arrest," argued Omar Jadwat, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Devon Orland, an assistant in Georgia's Attorney General's office, argued that there has been an "inherent misunderstanding between what the law does and doesn't do."

Judge Thrash had numerous challenging questions concerning the law.

"What is the purpose of the law?" Judge Thrashed asked Orland. "Is it to drive all illegals out of Georgia?"

Orland answered that the intent was to avoid public expense because of illegals.

"If they're here illegally, they need to become legal or find a legal place to live," said Orland.

Orland argued that Georgia's law mirrors federal law, and will allow local law enforcement agencies to crack down on illegals.

"They (federal agents) can't do it all," said Orland.

Governor Nathan Deal, the lead defendant in the lawsuit, has said repeatedly that blocking the new law would prolong the harm that he insists illegal immigrants continue to inflict on Georgia, using public services without paying taxes.

"I believe that the General Assembly was very careful to look at what had been in the Arizona statute and to not include some of the provisions that were the most controversial in that state's law." Gov. Deal told 11Alive News earlier this month. "They're not included in the Georgia statute. So I think we've avoided much of the criticism that Arizona heard, but at the same time trying to do something we think is meaningful."

The law makes it a crime for anyone to knowingly transport an illegal immigrant. The arresting officer would have to first stop the offender before charging with violating Georgia's immigration law.

Judge Thrash questioned if the law would make it criminal for a teenager in the country legally to drive his illegal mother to the grocery store. Orland answered that it would.

"It may be unkind, but it doesn't make it (the law) unconstitutional," said Orland. "Sometimes the law is harsh."

Jadwat said not to assume from the judge's challenging questions that he's leaning toward blocking enforcement of the law.

www.11alive.com

Federal judge zeros in on intent of Georgia's illegal immigration law Since when Is It up to a judge to question the "INTENT" of a duly elected representative of a states people ? ATLANTA, GA (WABE) - State and civil liberties groups argued for and against parts of Georgia's immigration law yesterday. The federal court judge's questioning zeroed in on the primary purpose of Georgia's law.

Immigrant advocates characterize Georgia's immigration law as a copycat law to Arizona, because it gives increased power to local law enforcement in immigration matters. But unlike the Arizona statute, the Georgia law does not have an explicitly defined intent. Arizona's law clearly states its intent: to decrease the number of illegal immigrants in the state.

Federal court judge Thomas Thrash tried to determine a purpose for the Georgia law. He asked Devon Orland, representing the state, if the purpose is to drive illegal immigrants out of Georgia or make sure they don't come in the first place.

Orland continually responded that the law's purpose was to save state resources, millions in health care and jailing costs.

Under repeated questioning, eventually, Orland said if immigrants are here illegally, they need to go soon.

Afterwards, D.A. King, a strong supporter of the bill, expressed dismay at the focus of the judge's questioning.

"I hope that the purpose of the law is intended to protect all of our citizens and immigrants. And if illegal aliens leave because we've made life very difficult for them in Georgia, all the better."

But Omar Jadwat, an ACLU attorney arguing the case, sees the law punishing more than illegal immigrants.

"I think the purpose of the law is to scapegoat and target both people who are here without status and their family members and their friends, and their neighbors. And again, it's really not Georgia's decision to make."

Thrash says he intends to deliver a ruling on the case before July 1st. (And we already know by his preemptive statements that he Is going to rule In favor of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ) http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wabe/ ... ration.law

Nathan Deal: Immigration law isn’t about ‘color of one’s skin’ In an interview with Lori Geary of Channel 2 Action News, Gov. Nathan Deal said Tuesday that:

a) Law enforcement personnel should begin training as if Georgia’s new illegal immigration law will go into effect July 1; b) the state will appeal if U.S. District Court Judge Tom Thrash issues an injunction; and c) he disagrees with former Gov. Sonny Perdue, who worries that Georgia is earning a reputation as a state where it’s not a good thing to be “of a different colorâ€