Updated Sep 5, 2012, 5:24 pm Originally posted Sep 5, 2012, 4:01 pm
A federal judge Wednesday cleared the way for Arizona to enforce what critics have dubbed the "papers please" provision of the SB 1070 anti-illegal immigration law.
Rejecting arguments on potential discrimination, the court did enjoin the "harboring" provision of the law.
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton lifted a two-year-old stay against enforcing the law, which requires police to determine the immigration status of those they arrest, or those whom they suspect are in the country without proper documentation.
The ruling does not mean SB 1070 will stand unchallenged; civil rights groups have vowed to collect data on how police enforce the law and sue to halt it if there is any discrimination.
The move follows a June U.S. Supreme Court decision that returned the case to Bolton, saying that the civil rights impact of the provision couldn't be known until it was enforced. Chief Justice John Roberts virtually invited a challenge to the law's enforcement when the high court struck down most of law's provisions.
Civil rights groups asked Bolton to toss out the law last month, claiming that it will lead to racial profiling, unreasonable detentions and other abuses.
Bolton rejected those claims in a 12-page ruling issued Wednesday.
"This Court will not ignore the clear direction in the Arizona opinion that Subsection 2(B) cannot be challenged further on its face before the law takes effect. As the Supreme Court stated, Plaintiffs and the United States may be able to challenge the provision on other preemption and constitutional grounds 'as interpreted and applied after it goes into effect," Bolton wrote.
Sponsorships available
Support TucsonSentinel.com & let thousands of daily readers know
your business cares about creating a HEALTHIER, MORE INFORMED Tucson
The judge did agree to block enforcement of a provision against harboring or transporting illegal aliens, writing:
Federal immigration law creates a comprehensive system to regulate the transportation, concealment, movement, or harboring of unlawfully present people in the United States. In crafting federal regulation of these activities, Congress permitted state law enforcement officials to arrest for violations of federal law, but did not allow for state regulation in the field.
***
It is immaterial to this analysis that S.B. 1070 might have the same goal as federal immigration law or incorporate some of the same substantive standards: “States may not enter, in any respect, an area the Federal Government has reserved for itself.”
Bolton asked the state and the U.S. Justice Department to propose a timetable for beginning to enforce the law.
Gov. Jan Brewer welcomed the ruling in a press release, saying "Arizona is one big step closer to implementing the core provision of SB 1070."
"After more than two years of legal challenges, it is time that Section 2(B) of SB 1070 take effect. ... It is clear the day of implementation is fast approaching," said Brewer.
In June, the Supreme Court tossed out much of SB 1070, striking down provisions that made it a state crime for immigrants to fail to carry "alien-registration papers;" one that allowed for warrantless arrest of anyone suspected of committing an offense that made them removable from the country; and one that made it a state crime for an undocumented person to seek work.
But the high court declined to toss out what proponents called the 2010 law's main provision: one requiring police to determine the immigration status of those they arrest before they are released, and to do so in the case of those they stop whom they suspect may be undocumented.
Justices did virtually invite a challenge to the law on civil rights grounds after enforcement began.
Like what you're reading? Support high-quality local journalism and help underwrite independent news without the spin.
"There is a basic uncertainty about what the law means and how it will be enforced," wrote Chief Justice Roberts in ruling on a case against the law brought by the U.S. Justice Department.
The ruling "does not foreclose other preemption and constitutional challenges to the law as interpreted and applied after it goes into effect."
Advocacy groups asked Bolton in July to block the law, saying it will lead to people being detained longer than is constitutionally permissible while they have their status checked by police.
The law's challengers, which include the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, also raised claims that SB 1070 will violate equal protection, citing statements by former state Sen. Russell Pearce and others. The ACLU and MALDEF said that the law was passed with an intent to discriminate.
"The ACLU of Arizona will act on the court's message and document racial profiling abuses throughout the state as the first step to guaranteeing equal treatment under the law," said Alessandra Soler, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona
"Latino members of our community should not be subjected to unlawful stops based on their race or perceived immigration status," she said in a statement. "Once this 'show me your papers' provision goes into effect, racial profiling will become rampant statewide, as it has been in Maricopa County, and we intend to ramp up our reporting and litigation efforts to seek justice on behalf of the victims of police abuse."
The enforcement of the highly charged law may become an issue in the fall election cycle. Latino voters are a core constituency of President Obama's.
Brewer said the ruling "will empower state and local law enforcement, as part of a legal stop or detention, to inquire about an individual’s immigration status when the officer has reasonable suspicion. With this provision, Arizona makes a clear statement that it will not tolerate sanctuary city policies, and will now have thousands of additional officers to collaborate with the federal government as state and local law enforcement do what they always have: enforce the law."
The Tucson Police Department is reviewing the decision, said a spokeswoman.
"The date in which the ruling takes effect is not yet known. The Tucson Police Department will obtain further guidance regarding the ruling prior to taking any specific enforcement action," said Sgt. Maria Hawke.
"We want to be clear that the Tucson Police Department will abide by Judge Bolton's ruling in its entirety," she said in a news release.
According to Hawke:
Tucson Police Department personnel have received several trainings related to SB1070. In June of 2010, all departmental personnel completed initial trainings. Additionally, personnel completed refresher training in June of 2012. All Tucson Police Department personnel will receive further clarification and direction following a comprehensive review of the ruling.
Deputies with the Pima County Sheriff's Department also received training on enforcement of the law in 2010.
TucsonSentinel.com's original reporting and curation of border and immigration news is generously supported in part by a grant from the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation.
Latest comments on this storyRead all 6 »
@Brittanicus
Thanks for your continued a-grammatical off-topic overposting. It truly advances the conversation as you continue your attempt to violate all of our User Guidelines at one go. Also, thanks for bringing to my attention that our comment guidelines don’t specifically prohibit posting in all-caps. One would think that the generally accepted rules of polite discourse would make that unnecessary, but that seems not to be the case.
The TEA PARTY people will be out in force to insure that the election laws we do have are fully enforced. Even so without safeguards the absentee ballot is easily compromised. In blue states the laws are so lax, that it’s inevitable there will be a paramount move to overlook non citizens voting. I am an Independent, who originally was in the Democratic fold. In November I am not voting for Obama, but not particularly happy with Romney either. I joined the Constitutional TEA PARTY, as they are for the self reliance, free fair commercial enterprise, reduction of government to the limits as written by our forefathers. Resume drilling for oil, natural gas and reopening the coal mines, with emphasis on not only clean coal production, but further research into new energy sources.
It’s like a rolling nausea as Millions of more illegal immigrants are going to be encouraged to slip past the border or step off an international jet, if President Obama returns to the White house in November. YOU—THE VOTERS HAVE TO DECIDE IF WE CAN AFFORD PAMPERING NOT ONLY THE 20 MILLION PLUS ILLEGAL ALIENS, ALREADY HERE OR THOSE WHO WILL ARRIVE WHEN SIGNALED THE FREE WELFARE UNDER OBAMA. It’s not so much the illegal alien invaders that is the problem, it’s the fact we have to pay for them through state forced unfunded mandates of the court. The biggest issue is the majority Democratic states with poorly supervised election stations, will turn a blind eye to non citizens voting. I am not going to tell you about the terrible consequences of the democrats passing another mass amnesty, even after we were promised that no blanket amnesty would ever be enacted again. But neither do I trust the Republicans to carry out the full pledge of the issues involved. Only the rapid absorption of the TEA PARTY LEADERSHIP into GOP does the chance of America resurfacing under the weight of this depressed economy and jobs.
It’s certainly obvious to any prudent person, that the only reason organization such as the Communist founded ACLU, doesn’t want the right of law enforcement officers to check on a person’s immigration status, is that Arizona being a frontier state is flooded with illegal alien migrants. What is strange that wherever you drive or wander that if you are in violation of the law, the police are going to ask for identification proof anyway? I think that with this law in effect, hundreds of thousands of illegal entrants are going to be packing up their belongings and heading for Liberal-Socialist states as California, Nevada where the laws are certainly unenforced and police by city mandates cannot question suspicious persons.
Legislators of both parties need to get off duffs; start issuing permit to drill for domestic oil, natural gas and reopen the coal mines that Obama’s czars have closed. President Obama is deep in the pockets of radical environmentalist, who are cutting us of regular fuels. You have seen the $4.00 rise of gas at the pumps, when 4 years ago it was just a $1.49. Shrink the mammoth burdensome U.S. government; closing many and merging agencies. Start from scratch a fair and equitable tax code; no more immunity for corporations and friends of politicians. Stop Obama from giving more power to the United Nations and international courts. Realize that America is heading towards insolvency, if we don’t get welfare programs under control, especially the (113 Billion annually and climbing) one hundred thirteen billion dollars going to subsidize illegal foreigners. Stop the spending and redistribution of welfare to illegal aliens, such as food stamps.
The TEA PARTY will let free trade succeed, but will sanction countries as China who are manipulating their coinage and cheating us. Resist Obama’s plan of Obamacare and free programs that allow the freeloaders to live as parasites of their host, the taxpayer. We cannot trust the Democrats who remain deliberately unconcerned with non-citizens voting. Both parties refuse to enact mandatory E-Verify (H.R. 2885), to expel illegal aliens from businesses, and a Birthright Citizenship law (H.R. 140), that allows a projected 400.000 babies a year who gain citizenship, without a parent holding U.S. citizenship status. ONLY BY REPLACING THE SENATE AND HOUSE INCUMBENTS WITH HONEST, SINCERE AND ABOVE ALL ELSE TEA PARTY LEADERSHIP WITH BACKBONE, SUCH AS TED CRUZ OF TEXAS, RICHARD MOURDOCK OF INDIANA.
THE TEA PARTY IS AMERICAS ONLY SALVATION AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION?
NOW IT’S UP TO YOU THE VOTER?