Ariz. immigration law gets new legal challenge

Jane Pauk of Phoenix, Arizona, shows her support in front of the U.S. Supreme Court after the court announced an immigration law ruling June 25, 2012 in Washington, DC. / Getty Images

(AP) PHOENIX - Opponents of Arizona's hardline immigration enforcement law launched a new effort Tuesday aimed at thwarting a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that will allow police to enforce the so-called "show me your papers" provision.

A coalition of civil rights groups, religious leaders and business organizations filed a new request seeking a court order that would prevent authorities from enforcing a rule that requires police to check the immigration status of people they stop for other reasons.

The groups are asking U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton to block enforcement of the requirement before it takes effect, arguing that Latinos in Arizona would face systematic racial profiling and unreasonably long detentions under the contentious section of the 2010 law.

In their 65-page filing, the coalition claims Arizona's immigration law "is pre-empted by federal law and violates the Fourth Amendment" and could "undermine trust between the police and community members, for whom a routine encounter with law enforcement will become a lengthy detention."

They also say that immigration patrols in recent years by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio — the Arizona lawman known for his rigid stance against illegal immigration — demonstrate that the law's requirement will disproportionately affect Latinos. Though the requirement hasn't taken effect, Arpaio said his officers have inquired about people's immigration status in the past.

Watch: Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez star in House immigration quiz
States move cautiously on immigration after Supreme Court ruling
Arizona police ask: Now what?

The National Immigration Law Center is one of the groups pushing the challenge in court along with the American Civil Liberties Union, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Asian American Justice Center, National Day Labor Organizing Network and others.

Matthew Benson, a spokesman for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, said "this latest legal challenge is unsurprising as opponents of SB 1070 have indicated they'll go to any length in order to block Arizona's implementation of this law.

"The Supreme Court has already spoken unanimously on the constitutionality of this provision. Gov. Brewer is hopeful Arizona law enforcement will soon at long last be empowered to enforce SB 1070, showing that it can be done fairly, lawfully and in harmony with civil rights and the Constitution," Benson added in a statement.

The latest filing, which was made part of a lawsuit filed by the coalition in 2010, comes the same day that Arpaio criticized comedian George Lopez's recent profanity-laced tirade against the sheriff. It also comes as Arpaio touted the findings of a volunteer posse, which the sheriff claimed has found definite proof that President Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate was a computer-generated forgery.

The Arizona Democratic Party said in a statement that Arpaio's investigation is intended to draw attention away from problems within his own agency. A call to Arpaio's office for comment wasn't immediately returned Tuesday evening.

Meanwhile, a civil trial is set to begin Thursday in a separate lawsuit that accuses Arpaio's office of racially profiling Latinos. The sheriff denies the allegations.

The suit filed by a handful of Latinos will serve as a precursor to the U.S. Justice Department's lawsuit that alleges a broader range of civil rights violations against Arpaio's office.

Although a different challenge to the Arizona law by the Obama administration succeeded in getting three other parts of the law thrown out by the Supreme Court last month, the administration failed to get the "show me your papers" requirement overturned on its argument that federal law trumps state law.

The justices upheld the requirement that officers question people's immigration status, saying that the provision could be subject to additional legal challenges. The coalition is seeking to shelve the requirement on other grounds.

Arizona's law was passed in 2010 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.

Legal experts say the groups face an uphill battle in trying to persuade Bolton to bar enforcement of the requirement because the lower courts might want to wait until the requirement — which won't take effect until at least Friday — is enforced to consider actual injuries from the law, rather than confront the potential for harm.

Even if opponents don't succeed in getting the requirement put on hold, some backers of the law are questioning the level of cooperation they will get from federal immigration authorities, who will be called to verify people's immigration status and be responsible for picking up illegal immigrants from local officers.

Federal immigration officers have said they will help, but only if doing so conforms to their priorities, including catching repeat violators and identifying and removing those who threaten public safety and national security.

If federal agents decline to pick up illegal immigrants, local officers in some cases will likely have to let them go unless they're suspected of committing a crime that would require them to be brought to jail.

[Galactus909]

The only real answer to this mess is Enforcement. The Federal Government must being enforcing our immigration laws. Deport all illegal aliens, secure the border and fine anyone who hires an illegal alien. We tried Amnesty in 1986 and it did not work. We have 11 million more illegals today.

[sadiedog1]

this whole thing is stupid . for people who oppose our immigration policy ,maybe they shouldn't be here either . this is so simple ,if you are not a citizen or trying to become one you don't belong here . period

[rightontarget]

Well, even though I am soooooo against "Mittens" getting into the White House (I think he is a wealthy, big business puppet with hidden money in Swiss Bank accounts and is all about the rich getting richer and to heck with the middle class) and am soooooo fed up with the obstructionist Congress, I do agree with the law that absolutely EVERYBODY should be required to be able to PROVE that they are in this country LEGALLY. Citizenship, work visa, tourist visa, WHATEVER. If you are here LEGALLY, then fine. If you are NOT, then GET THE HECK OUT! NO EXCUSES FOR YA! Too many really great people immigrated to this country LEGALLY. It is such an INSULT to them to even refer to "illigals" as "immigrants". The REAL immigrants came here LEGALLY. If you STEAL something (in this case your residency) you should NOT be allowed to keep it. It IS a crime and you should be punished and sent home (because your "home" is NOT here!) I don't care WHAT country you came from or what your reason for being here is, if you are not here LEGALLY GET OUT!!!

[nohater]

everyone stopped by law enforcement should have to provide proof of citizenship, every single person. there are illegals from china, russia, ukraine, korea, middle east, africa in general and other nations besides mexico. what is interesting is that cubans get a free pass if they make it to Florida's beaches. cubans are escaping cuba's castro regime but people from all over the world are trying to escape oppressive regimes. any individual stopped by law enforcement should have to prove citizenship regardless of their skin color.

[Shasiti]

I am blonde hair blue eyed AMERICAN whom everytime I get pulled over for a tailight not working, I HAVE TO show the police officers MY "PAPERS" so does every other LEGAL AMERICAN!! It's called a Driver's License and proof of Insurance. He can even search my car if he feels he has probabable cause. What makes illegals so special they do not have to provide ANY identification???????? So if I have brown skin I can tell the police to take a hike or it's racial profiling?? Bull^%$#!!! Get your papers straight, americans HAVE TOO or we can go to jail!!!!! Have any of you hispanics read your own immigration laws??? Get it right or go home!!!!

[SUZAMBA]

Brown Skin?? Many LEGAL AMERICAN'S have "Brown Skin!" Illegals come from every country and they don't have "Brown Skin!" In a real world, everyone might be legal, but this isn't a real world, it's American, and nothing in American is 100%!
Are you sure Obama is legal???
Not according to the papers and he is call President?

[azjustin]

That's it, I'm renouncing my citizenship.

Why?

I can no longer be held accountable (or deported) if I break laws! Not to mention: free housing, free cell phones, free food, free utilities, free health care....etc.

All I will have to do is quit my job.

[Ulgnud]

Amazing. We have to fight our own government to get them to do their Constitutionally Mandated duty. What are they waiting for? For us the citizens to finally get fed up and clean these illegal invaders out ourselves?.

[jbt2861]

Think before you say, DocD.

[pokey5735]

Time is near. The government is bound and determined to destroy this country.