Thread: Victory in Arizona Court Challenge!!!!

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/132945

Published: 06.09.2006

Illegal mmigrants may be prosecuted for hiring smugglers, judge rules
By Howard Fischer
CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES
PHOENIX -- People who hire coyotes to get them into this country can be prosecuted under a year-old state law designed to crack down on smugglers, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled Friday.
Judge Thomas O'Toole rejected arguments by an attorney for several illegal migrants that they cannot be charged with conspiring to smuggle themselves across the border. He said state law makes it clear that when two or more people are involved in a plan to break the law, that constitutes a conspiracy.
The judge also said federal immigration laws do not preempt states from imposing their own regulations.
That part of the ruling has potential implications beyond the specific questions of the statute in question. It also goes to the ongoing fight at the Capitol over whether the state has the power to enact various laws dealing with border crossers -- and specifically whether it can punish companies that hire undocumented workers.
In fact, O'Toole cited several federal appellate court rulings which upheld laws from other states to regulate immigration at long as those laws do not conflict with federal laws. One of those cases even involves a California law to penalize employers who hire those not in this country legally.
Friday's ruling most immediately is a victory for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and County Attorney Andrew Thomas. Both have used the 2005 law to arrest and prosecute groups of immigrants who are being guided into Arizona by a paid smuggler. They sought to have the charges dismissed, saying the law did not apply to them.
But while it gives Thomas the go-ahead to proceed against the defendants, he still has to prove that they were, in fact, involved in a conspiracy.
The ruling comes despite public statements by sponsors of the legislation that their intent was to give state and local police some legal options to arrest and prosecute the people in the business of bringing people across the border for money. Both Senate Majority Leader Tim Bee and Rep. Jonathan Paton, both Tucson Republicans, said they never designed the measure to go after the immigrants themselves.
But O'Toole said the statute is clear "and there is no evidence from the legislative history that the Legislature intended to exclude any prosecution for conspiracy to commit human smuggling.''
He said the statute makes it illegal to smuggle humans.
More to the point, the judge said lawmakers have long authorized prosecutors to charge people with conspiring to violate various laws. And that conspiracy law makes it illegal for anyone to agree with anyone else to break the law and then commit an "overt act in furtherance of that offense.''
The fact that the conspiracy involves people smuggling themselves does not make it any less of a crime, O'Toole concluded.
Paton told Capitol Media Services he introduced the legislation to supplement federal laws aimed at smugglers.
"The U.S. Attorney's Office, because of resources and the like couldn't keep up with all the cases they had,'' Paton said. This was designed to let state prosecutors pick up the slack and go after those who smuggle people for pay.
Paton said he never thought the measure would be used to arrest immigrants themselves. But O'Toole did not have the benefit of those thoughts: Paton said no one involved in the case ever talked with him.
O'Toole also rebuffed arguments that the law is preempted by various federal statutes regulating immigration. The judge said Congress has not claimed exclusive right to deal with immigration, saying states can use their own legislative powers to address their own problems.
"As is evident from the legislative history leading up to its passage and signing by the governor in 2005, it was determined that the problem of smuggling and transporting illegal aliens for profit in Arizona directly impacted the safety and welfare of the citizens of the state,'' O'Toole wrote.

This is the best news I have heard in awhile. Hopefully this will serve a 3 fold purpose. First it will give other law enforcement authorities the impetus to start controlling their parts of the border who were reluctant to do so because they may have been
awaiting a legal precedent in this case. Secondly, hopefully it will apply additional pressure to Gov Napolitano especially from her constituents to take a more active role in controlling the massive influx of illegal aliens into her state. Lastly, hopefully the damn Mexican government will get the message that they cannot usurp U.S. laws, and maybe (wishfull thinking) they will start keeping their noses out of our business and worry about their own affairs and try to improve their third world toilet of a country.

a victory for state's rights!

If the States don't do it, it's not going to get done, it is as simple as that! The federal gov is not going to enforce their own laws they have proven that time and time again! Why couldn't this good man Joe, the moxie sherrif run against some of these jerks running in Az as Senator or Congressman?

Originally Posted by nittygritty

If the States don't do it, it's not going to get done, it is as simple as that!

I couldn't agree more. I've done everything I can do - I've practically begged the governors office to do something, but they 'trust' Congess. It's gotten to the point where when I call, I can almost hear the contempt in the silence.

I love freedom, I love truth and justice. Do I not have the right to petition my government -- state and federal -- to preserve and protect those rights? It's true that some of my proposals are radical, but guess what, so were our founding fathers when they declared their independence.

And though radical, my proposals are in strict compliance with the Constitution which is more than I can say for the acts of Congress, the President and many governors of the states.

So when our country gets sold out completely and we have no protected rights under the Constitution, we can thank not only Congress and the President, we can also thank the governors of the states because they failed to defend the citizens of their states against the federal government -- they failed to defend state's rights.

Mamie - following the letter of the Constitution is not at all radical and you should not feel that way.

Every American citizen should be demanding our Constitution be upheld and followed, because it clearly is not.

Who thought there would come a day when following the Constitution of the United States of America would be a radical idea?

Originally Posted by dlm1968

Mamie - following the letter of the Constitution is not at all radical and you should not feel that way.

Every American citizen should be demanding our Constitution be upheld and followed, because it clearly is not.

Who thought there would come a day when following the Constitution of the United States of America would be a radical idea?

you don't know how I need to hear that -- THANK YOU!!!

And who ever thought our government would be uniting with foreigners against the American people -- it's a sad day in our country indeed when aliens are treated with my dignity and compassion than citizens