Fed judge: Ariz. police can check for papers
A protester opposed to Arizona's Immigration Law SB 1070 argues with a police officer April 25, 2012, in Phoenix, Arizona. / Jonathan Gibby/Getty Images
(AP) PHOENIX - A federal judge ruled Wednesday that Arizona authorities can enforce the most contentious section of the state's immigration law, which critics have dubbed the "show me your papers" provision.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton clears the way for police to carry out the 2010 law's requirement that officers, while enforcing other laws, question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally.
The requirement has been at the center of a two-year legal battle that culminated in a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June upholding the requirement.
Opponents then asked Bolton to block the requirement, arguing that it would lead to systematic racial profiling and unreasonably long detentions of Latinos if it's enforced.
Gov. Jan Brewer
Lawyers for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer urged the judge to let the requirement go into effect, saying the law's opponents were merely speculating in their racial profiling claims, that police have received training to avoid discriminatory practices and that officers must have "reasonable suspicion" that a person is in the country illegally to trigger the requirement.
In her ruling, Bolton said the court will not ignore the clear direction from the Supreme Court that the provision "cannot be challenged further on its face before the law takes effect." She reiterated the high court's interpretation that the law might be able to be challenged as unconstitutional on other grounds.
To the supporters of Arizona's law, the questioning requirement was the most important part of the statute, whose stated purpose was to reduce the problems associated with illegal immigration through enforcement the state's policy.
Ariz. gov. stirs immigration controversy again
Window opens on Obama deportation delay program
Young illegal immigrants can join new program
Among the opponents of the law was the Obama administration, which challenged the law based on the argument that federal immigration law trumped Arizona law. The challenge didn't confront racial profiling. The administration failed to persuade the nation's highest court to strike down the questioning requirement.
Immigrant rights groups believe the requirement presented the most opportunities for civil rights abuses.
Shortly before the law was to take effect in July 2010, Bolton prevented police from enforcing the questioning requirement and other parts of the statute, ruling the Obama administration would likely succeed in showing federal law trumps the state law.
Brewer, who signed the measure into law, appealed the ruling, lost at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and took her case to the Supreme Court.
Less controversial sections of the law have been in effect since late July 2010, but have rarely been used.
Arizona's law was passed amid voter frustration with the state's role as the busiest illegal entry point into the country. Five states - Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah - have adopted variations on Arizona's law.
Brewer's office said the law is expected to go into effect shortly.
"The courts have now consistently found that the plaintiffs have not met the high bar in arguing this law needs to be enjoined before it's allowed to take effect," gubernatorial spokesman Matthew Benson said. "Certainly Gov. Brewer is pleased with this decision. She believes it's time SB1070 is implemented and so that we can see how effective this law is in practice."
Karen Tumlin, an attorney for the National Immigration Law Center, said her office was "considering our legal options" after Bolton's ruling.
"We were surprised and disappointed," said Dan Pochoda, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona.
Bolton did, however, grant a preliminary injunction against a statute making it illegal to harbor individuals suspected of being in the country illegally.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Massive tornado hits Okla. 46 Photos
- Mile-wide tornado rips through Oklahoma City area
- Another tornado touches down near Oklahoma City
- Oklahoma tornado carves trail of destruction Play Video
- Firefighter killed in massive Dallas condo fire
- Severe tornado tears through Oklahoma City suburb Play Video
- Could cop have avoided accidentally killing NY student? 159 Comments
- Record Fla. Powerball winner can't remain anonymous
Many laws start out as secondaries (not main reason for stopping), but then become primaries(main reason or only reason) for stopping the person. An example is seat belt laws. Many states started issuing tickets only if they stopped your for another offense and you were not searing the belt. Now it is a primary reason for stopping a motorist.
I understand that such an example is completely different from the immigration situation, but can attest to time that states expand secondaries to become primaries.
It has nothing to do with race, because there are illegals from other countries, it's just much easier for those from Mexico, due to the proximity of their border.
I get to see first hand how my Irish grandparents were treated when they arrived in America. The Puritans loved those poor stinky uneducated Irish that liked to drink. They had parades for them. They liked the poor Polish and Italians too.
One day there'll be more Hispanics in North America/United States. They will become a large voting block. They may be the ones in power. Wouldn't that be ironic? The other poor hardworking immigrants did just that.
That will be interesting to watch.
Which is why Obama is questioned, since his father was a registered citizen of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth. The UK also didn't allow for dual citizenship and still doesn't in most Providences.
It has nothing to do with the fact that the Constitution was framed that State's were able to enjoy individual say on what happened within their own borders.
There is a reason the name is United STATES of America...
It's quite clear that Federal Law is to supersede when there is a conflict. But the Federal Statue does deem aliens here without proper papers are deemed Illegal... so unless they change that, enforcement at the State level IS the State's responsibility, period.