Supreme Court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law

[garbon]

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/06/-supreme-court-strikes-down-most-of-arizona-immigration-law/1#.T-h1u7VYuSo

The Supreme Court today struck down most of Arizona's controversial law aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants.

The court left standing only the "check your papers" part of the law that requires state and local police to perform roadside immigration checks of people they've stopped or detained if a "reasonable suspicion" exists they are in the country illegally.

The court indicated that that would face further scrutiny.

The court rejected the parts of the law that making it a state crime for illegal immigrants not to possess their federal registration cards; for illegal imigrants to work, apply for work or solicit work; and a section that allowed state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant when probable cause exists that they committed "any public offense that makes the person removable from the United States."

The law, known as SB1010, has become a flashpoint for the debate over how to enforce immigration in the U.S. and served as a blueprint for similar laws in five other states - Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah.

President Obama called the Arizona law "misguided" and his Department of Justice sued the state. Former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney said he would drop the federal lawsuit against Arizona and adopted the Arizona-inspired idea of making life so difficult for illegal immigrants that they choose to "self-deport."

Four key provisions of the law were blocked by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton in Phoenix, a ruling that was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court in San Francisco. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, and both sides held oral arguments on April 25.

Sponsors said the law was necessary because the federal government has failed to control the influx of illegal immigrants into the country, forcing states like Arizona to grapple with the security concerns and high costs of educating and caring for illegal immigrants. They said the law simply empowers police and state officials to help enforce federal immigration laws.

Opponents said it unfairly criminalizes otherwise law-abiding people, opens the door for racial profiling of Hispanics legally in the country and forces state law enforcement to interfere with the intricacies of federal immigration policy.

[DontSayBanana]

Awesome.

[Sheilbh]

I was on Twitter when this new broke.  I saw two headlines: 'Supreme court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law' and 'US Supreme Court upholds key part of tough Arizona immigration law, in defeat for Obama'.  Election years

[alfred russel]

I was on Twitter when this new broke.  I saw two headlines: 'Supreme court strikes down most of Arizona immigration law' and 'US Supreme Court upholds key part of tough Arizona immigration law, in defeat for Obama'.  Election years

Which twitter feed said the latter? Fox news?

Would I be cynical to think this is political cover for wrecking health care?

[Sheilbh]

It was Reuters.  The first was AP.

[Hansmeister]

The key part opponents of the bill objected to was upheld:  The requirement that all people arrested have their immigration status checked, while the parts that were overturned were penalties that were at the periphery of the issue were thrown out.  Although even in upholding the central statute the SC was very narrow, leaving room for future lawsuits if it can be shown to violate individual rights.  Overall it is a narrow win for the enforcement side, albeit one that could prove temporary.

[The Minsky Moment]

Of course it is a great conservative victory, which explains why Scalia, Thomas and Alito all dissented.   

Even on 2B it was not an unvarnished win for Arizona, because the Court merely said it was premature to make a facial challenge without first finding out how the state would apply and implement.  The Court left open the window for future challenges.

[Neil]

Even the Supreme Court can't decide whether illegal immigration is actually illegal or not.

[derspiess]

Even the Supreme Court can't decide whether illegal immigration is actually illegal or not.

Yeah, but only as far as states are concerned.  At the federal level it's definitely illegal, and the feds are asserting their authority to do a shitty job of enforcing the law.

[jimmy olsen]

Sheriff Joe should definitely investigate Beiber 

This dude's sarcasm is great. 
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/rep-gutierrez-rips-arizona-immigration-law-191856141.html

Video
http://d.yimg.com/nl/ytv/cbs/player.html#vid=29818656&browseCarouselUI=hide

Rep. Gutierrez rips Arizona immigration law
By Mike Krumboltz | The Ticket – Thu, Jun 28, 2012

Justin Bieber is many things: Singer, actor ... Canadian? It's true! And Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (D-Ill.) used the Bieb's Canadian ancestry to make a point about the controversial Arizona immigration law.

Gutierrez, who is against the law that allows Arizona law enforcement officials to ask those deemed suspicious for proof of American citizenship, raised the point on the House floor that judging whether or not somebody is from the U.S. based on appearance is illogical and silly. And, he argues, rather difficult.

He used Justin Bieber and girlfriend Selena Gomez as examples. Gutierrez played a game called, "Pick the immigrant." With great sarcasm, he addressed the House floor.

"I'm sure Justin helped Gomez learn American customs and feel more at home in her adopted country. Oh, wait a minute, I'm sorry. Because I'm not a trained Arizona official, I somehow got that backwards. Actually, Ms. Gomez of Texas has helped Mr. Bieber of Canada learn about his adopted country. Justin, when you perform in Phoenix, remember to bring your papers."

Gutierrez used several more examples, including Ted Koppel (born in England) and Geraldo Rivera (Brooklyn), and hoops stars Jeremy Lin (Los Angeles) and Tony Parker (Belgium). Gutierrez closed by saying, "The idea that any government official can determine who belongs in America and who doesn't simply by looking at them is completely ridiculous, unfair and un-American, and yet this absurdity is the law of Arizona."

You can watch Gutierrez's full presentation below.

[merithyn]

I used to love it when acquaintances would go on and on about illegal immigrants in this country to Max, knowing he was Canadian. "Oh, not like you. After all, you're Canadian!"  Right, because Canada is really just another state, not its own nation or anything.

[Neil]

I used to love it when acquaintances would go on and on about illegal immigrants in this country to Max, knowing he was Canadian. "Oh, not like you. After all, you're Canadian!"  Right, because Canada is really just another state, not its own nation or anything.

Max isn't an illegal.

[Ed Anger]

I'd like to see open season the stream of Canucks streaming down I-75 every winter.

[merithyn]

Max isn't an illegal.

Not anymore, he isn't.

[katmai]

I think we should deport Meri and her whole brood.