Arizona Immigration Law Faces Legal Challenges
The debate over Arizona's new illegal immigrant law will likely move from protest lines and talk shows to the courtroom, where a judge could be asked to decide whether the state can enforce laws that until now had been the federal government's exclusive domain.
Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the bill on Friday, said Arizona must act because Washington has failed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs from Mexico.
Republican Arizona Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain echoed that sentiment Tuesday.
"This law is a response to the president's and the administration's failure to secure our borders," McCain told CBS' "The Early Show". "The federal government has a responsibility to secure the borders, they have not."
Opposition to the law grew Monday as opponents used refried beans to smear swastikas on the state Capitol, civil rights leaders and others demanded a boycott of the state, a petition drive began to put the measure to a public vote and the Obama administration weighed a possible legal challenge.
Activists are planning a challenge of their own, hoping to block the law from taking effect by arguing that it encroaches on the federal government's authority to regulate immigration and violates people's constitutional rights by giving police too much power.
The measure - set to take effect in late July or early August - would make it a crime under state law to be in the U.S. illegally. It directs state and local police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal.
"If you look or sound foreign, you are going to be subjected to never-ending requests for police to confirm your identity and to confirm your citizenship," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, which is exploring legal action.
Employees at the Capitol came to work Monday to find that vandals had smeared swastikas on the windows. And protesters gathered for an eighth straight day to speak out against a law they say will lead to rampant racial profiling of anyone who looks Hispanic.
"I do not want any discriminatory behavior," McCain told CBS News, saying he had spoken to senior law enforcement officers who told him "they think they can implement this law without racial profiling."
Junior Perez, 19, has heard the assurances that the law is aimed only at illegal immigrants. He's not convinced.
"If I'm a citizen or not, I'll always be Mexican," Perez told CBS News correspondent John Blackstone.
He is a citizen, born in Arizona. His parents are legal immigrants from Mexico and are citizens, too. In a state where more than 30 percent of the population is Hispanic, many feel the sting of racism in the new law.
"They're just focusing on us because we're brown, and it's devastating," said Perez.
Jon Garrido, who produces a Hispanic website and ran unsuccessfully last year for Phoenix City Council, told The Arizona Republic Monday he pulled organizing papers for a petition drive to repeal the law. A referendum would require the signature of 76,682 registered voters to get on the November ballot. If successful, the effort would block the law from taking effect until the vote.
President Obama, who warned last week that the measure could lead to police abuses, asked the Justice Department to complete a review of the law's implications before deciding how to proceed.
A San Francisco lawmaker who came to the United States as an undocumented teenager plans to introduce legislation Tuesday calling for a citywide economic boycott of Arizona to protest the state's strict new immigration law.
"We are not going to use our city resources to support that law," said Supervisor David Campos, who is himself an immigrant from Guatemala and became a U.S. citizen in 1997.
Currently, many U.S. police departments do not ask about people's immigration status unless they have run afoul of the law in some other way. Many departments say stopping and questioning people will only discourage immigrants from cooperating to solve crimes.
Under the new Arizona law, immigrants unable to produce documents showing they are allowed to be in the U.S. could be arrested, jailed for up to six months and fined $2,500. That is a significant escalation of the typical federal punishment for being here illegally - deportation.
People arrested by Arizona police would be turned over to federal immigration officers. Opponents said the federal government could thwart the law by refusing to accept them.
Supporters of the law said it is necessary to protect Arizonans. The state is home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants and is the nation's busiest gateway for people slipping into the country. Brewer has ordered state officials to develop a training course for officers to learn what constitutes reasonable suspicion that someone is in the U.S. illegally.
The crux of opponents' arguments is that only the federal government has the authority to regulate immigration.
"If every state had its own laws, we wouldn't be one country; we'd be 50 different countries," said Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Kevin Johnson, dean of the law school at the University of California-Davis and an immigration law professor, said such a lawsuit would have a very good chance of success. He said the state law gets into legal trouble by giving local law enforcement officers the authority to enforce immigration laws.
However, Gerald Neuman, a Harvard Law School professor, said Arizona could make a compelling legal argument that it has overlapping authority to protect its residents.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who helped write the Arizona legislation, said he anticipated legal challenges and carefully drafted the language. He said the state law is only prohibiting conduct already illegal under federal law.
San Francisco's city attorney has urged policymakers in the city to stop dealing with Arizona and Arizona businesses. Leaders in Mexico also demanded a boycott, as did civil rights leader Al Sharpton.
During a town hall meeting Monday in Tucson, Brewer dismissed the threat of a boycott, saying she doesn't believe the law is "going to have the kind of economic impact that some people think it might," the Arizona Daily Star reported.
The law has strong public support in Arizona, where passions have been running high since a rancher was killed close to the Mexican border last month, apparently by drug smugglers from across the border.
© 2010 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the bill on Friday, said Arizona must act because Washington has failed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants and drugs from Mexico.
Republican Arizona Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain echoed that sentiment Tuesday.
"This law is a response to the president's and the administration's failure to secure our borders," McCain told CBS' "The Early Show". "The federal government has a responsibility to secure the borders, they have not."
Opposition to the law grew Monday as opponents used refried beans to smear swastikas on the state Capitol, civil rights leaders and others demanded a boycott of the state, a petition drive began to put the measure to a public vote and the Obama administration weighed a possible legal challenge.
Activists are planning a challenge of their own, hoping to block the law from taking effect by arguing that it encroaches on the federal government's authority to regulate immigration and violates people's constitutional rights by giving police too much power.
The measure - set to take effect in late July or early August - would make it a crime under state law to be in the U.S. illegally. It directs state and local police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal.
"If you look or sound foreign, you are going to be subjected to never-ending requests for police to confirm your identity and to confirm your citizenship," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, which is exploring legal action.
Employees at the Capitol came to work Monday to find that vandals had smeared swastikas on the windows. And protesters gathered for an eighth straight day to speak out against a law they say will lead to rampant racial profiling of anyone who looks Hispanic.
"I do not want any discriminatory behavior," McCain told CBS News, saying he had spoken to senior law enforcement officers who told him "they think they can implement this law without racial profiling."
Junior Perez, 19, has heard the assurances that the law is aimed only at illegal immigrants. He's not convinced.
"If I'm a citizen or not, I'll always be Mexican," Perez told CBS News correspondent John Blackstone.
He is a citizen, born in Arizona. His parents are legal immigrants from Mexico and are citizens, too. In a state where more than 30 percent of the population is Hispanic, many feel the sting of racism in the new law.
"They're just focusing on us because we're brown, and it's devastating," said Perez.
Jon Garrido, who produces a Hispanic website and ran unsuccessfully last year for Phoenix City Council, told The Arizona Republic Monday he pulled organizing papers for a petition drive to repeal the law. A referendum would require the signature of 76,682 registered voters to get on the November ballot. If successful, the effort would block the law from taking effect until the vote.
President Obama, who warned last week that the measure could lead to police abuses, asked the Justice Department to complete a review of the law's implications before deciding how to proceed.
A San Francisco lawmaker who came to the United States as an undocumented teenager plans to introduce legislation Tuesday calling for a citywide economic boycott of Arizona to protest the state's strict new immigration law.
"We are not going to use our city resources to support that law," said Supervisor David Campos, who is himself an immigrant from Guatemala and became a U.S. citizen in 1997.
Currently, many U.S. police departments do not ask about people's immigration status unless they have run afoul of the law in some other way. Many departments say stopping and questioning people will only discourage immigrants from cooperating to solve crimes.
Under the new Arizona law, immigrants unable to produce documents showing they are allowed to be in the U.S. could be arrested, jailed for up to six months and fined $2,500. That is a significant escalation of the typical federal punishment for being here illegally - deportation.
People arrested by Arizona police would be turned over to federal immigration officers. Opponents said the federal government could thwart the law by refusing to accept them.
Supporters of the law said it is necessary to protect Arizonans. The state is home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants and is the nation's busiest gateway for people slipping into the country. Brewer has ordered state officials to develop a training course for officers to learn what constitutes reasonable suspicion that someone is in the U.S. illegally.
The crux of opponents' arguments is that only the federal government has the authority to regulate immigration.
"If every state had its own laws, we wouldn't be one country; we'd be 50 different countries," said Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Kevin Johnson, dean of the law school at the University of California-Davis and an immigration law professor, said such a lawsuit would have a very good chance of success. He said the state law gets into legal trouble by giving local law enforcement officers the authority to enforce immigration laws.
However, Gerald Neuman, a Harvard Law School professor, said Arizona could make a compelling legal argument that it has overlapping authority to protect its residents.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor who helped write the Arizona legislation, said he anticipated legal challenges and carefully drafted the language. He said the state law is only prohibiting conduct already illegal under federal law.
San Francisco's city attorney has urged policymakers in the city to stop dealing with Arizona and Arizona businesses. Leaders in Mexico also demanded a boycott, as did civil rights leader Al Sharpton.
During a town hall meeting Monday in Tucson, Brewer dismissed the threat of a boycott, saying she doesn't believe the law is "going to have the kind of economic impact that some people think it might," the Arizona Daily Star reported.
The law has strong public support in Arizona, where passions have been running high since a rancher was killed close to the Mexican border last month, apparently by drug smugglers from across the border.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Reporter Michael Hastings dies at 33
- Google asks FISA court to lift gag order on NSA requests
- Taliban: We killed 4 U.S. troops at Afghan air base
- Scientists say shipwreck timber in Lake Michigan centuries old
- Tornado briefly touches down on Denver airport runways
- Girl who lost feet in lawnmower gets prosthetics
- TWA Flight 800 gets another look 17 years later
- FAA approval sought for 650-foot-tall Vegas thrill ride
<a href="http://www.arizonaimmigration.co/index.php">Federal immigration law</a>
cannot be enforced because it is inherently racist are an insult to the
intelligence of those to whom such absurd claims are directed. Rallies and
public demonstrations by unlawful aliens or their supporters demanding
non-existent rights are a still bigger mistake. One wonders what on earth people
behind such grotesquely irrational and offensive maneuvers can possibly be
thinking. To make matters still worse, the president of Mexico, with the help of
<a href="http://arizonaimmigration.co/obama-immigration.html">Mr. Obama</a> and
the Democrats, has said things that Americans will not soon forget and that
diminish still further the already scant sympathy for unlawful aliens.<br>
<br>
I am confident that a substantial majority of Americans favor a policy of
strict, even Draconian enforcement of<a href="http://arizonaimmigration.co/immigration-problems.html">
immigration law</a>, and that continued attempts by those trying to confuse the
issues and obstruct such enforcement are only going to cause them to become more
vocal and militant in support of such
<a href="http://arizonaimmigration.co/immigration-jobs.html">enforcement</a>.
The best service those who do not wish the law to be enforced could do their
cause would be to be quiet in hopes that tempers will cool off at least a bit.
All they are doing by arguing is pouring gasoline on the fire.<br>
<br>
The simple and obvious fact is that there are people who do not want Federal
immigration law to be enforced by any means whatever, and they are desperate and
reaching for any straw they can find to argue against a long overdue and
rational measure such as SB 1070 in
<a href="http://arizonaimmigration.co/arizona-immigration.html">Arizona</a>.
This is a serious mistake because it only antagonizes and hardens the resolve of
Americans who want something done about unlawful aliens.<br>
<br>
It is also nonsense to try to misrepresent an immigration law matter as a racial
matter, when anybody can plainly see that race has nothing in the world to do
with whether one is or is not a lawful resident of the United States.</p>
Congratulations to the state of Arizona for passing a law that prohibits illegal immigrants from getting rewarded for breaking our laws by entering our country illegally, and for punish those employees that hire these illegal immigrants knowing that they are breaking our laws just to save money.
I?m not against immigrants from coming to this country in search of a better life but I am against giving them getting special treatment for entering the country illegally and getting rewarded for breaking our laws.
No one group should be giving preferential treatment over another.
Illegal immigrants seem to think that they are entitled to everything because they are illegal immigrants.
Most illegal immigrants enter our country illegally, steal jobs from American, steal services that are afforded legal people, don?t pay taxes, sell stolen stuff such as CD?s, Pocketbooks, and other such stuff and have the nerve to think that their civil and constitutional rights are being violated, what a crock of crap.
There are too many protection rights for illegal immigrants and not enough for American born or legal immigrants who came in to this country the right way and pay their share of taxes and who really work hard to become an American and who follow our laws.
The federal government needs to start doing the right thing and punish those criminals from getting anything that they do not deserve.
The liberals are the ones who are ruining this country known as the United States of America and who are falling for this sham that illegal immigrants deserve everything, case in point, the terrorist who blew up the Twin Towers and the pentagon and who high jacked all those planes on September 11th, 2001.
The recent terrorist attempts by the people who wanted to blow up our subway system.
When are the American people going to start to get in involved and say enough is enough?
American people are too soft and wait until it?s to late, like a terrorist attack to get involved, we need to get involved now before we have more terrorist killing our people and before the United States of America become another third world country.
A lot of illegal immigrants are filthy people who don?t think twice about throwing garbage everywhere and who disrespect our country and our women.
A lot of illegal immigrants hate Americans and hate our country and have no problems stating that, but they forget if it wasn?t for America, they wouldn?t be living a better life then they did in their own countries.
I say if illegal immigrants don?t like America, then they can always go back to their ravage, filthy country and see how good they have it here.
Illegal immigrants need to start respecting our country and see how good they got it or they could always go back to what they didn?t have before.
These are my own opinions and beliefs from my own observation of illegal immigrants and don?t reflect everyone else?s.
Thank You.
Sincerely,
Paul Priore
(Flushing, New York.)
===========
Are you forgetting that the anti-Liberals were in power for 8 years and did NOTHING to solve this problem! Are you forgetting the Anti-Liberals were the ones in power when 9/11 happened?
And also - this law does NOTHING to punish the people hiring the illegals! It also does Nothing to close the door they're all coming thru!
But I also don?t believe the proposed Arizona law is going to solve any of these problems, but rather it will create division among it citizens.
Economy is the source of illegal immigration problems. It?s a simple supply and demand product of capitalism. As long as there are needs for illegal immigrant, they will come and they will stay.
We must tackle the problem from its sources but not by implementing a law that only concentrate on attacking part of the problem.
As an American, I still believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty...this law is making us drift away from this principle.
Your wife had the benefit of being able to wait two years, most dont have that luxury and need to leave sooner or their lives could depend on it. Especially when your home is riddled with gun fire on a regular basis. I'm not telling you that its alright to break immigration laws yet your conviction is empty when compared to the well being of your family. If bringing my child to the states allows me to escape that lifestyle and keep my family from harm then all due respect to the laws of the land but they can kiss my a--.
Anyone not willing to die or sacrifice law for the greater good of their family is ether a bad father, and idiot, or someone who care nothing about their children. I have a deep respect for this country and their laws yet that takes a back seat to the well being of my family. The Irish did it when Belfast was war torn, the french, poland,
and Austrians did it when they fled in order to escape WWI and II.
there's not much of a differnce between the streets of Mexico and a
full fledged war in any other country yet those abroad are allowed to enter based on being political prisoners.
=========
So many people don't want to acknowledge all that by looking at the bigger picture.
When someone is shooting at your family, priorities change!
Exactly, why didnt bush secure our borders?