In a preliminary ruling yesterday, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton declared that the core provisions of Arizona’s controversial immigration law are unconstitutional and therefore cannot take effect today as scheduled.
This means, among other things, that illegal immigrants in this state do not have to carry their papers at all times; that they cannot be arrested for seeking employment; and that the police cannot check their immigration status while enforcing any other traffic or criminal law.
Here in part is how the judge justified her ruling:
There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new law [i.e., racial profiling]… Even though Arizona’s interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce pre-empted laws.
(U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, Associated Press, July 28, 2010)
But I knew it would be thus; for here, in part, is how I commented on this law after it was enacted earlier this year:
I was relatively pleased when Arizona legislators rushed on May 3 to enact several amendments to address well-founded concerns about racial profiling. But these amendments still do not address the inherent flaw in this legislation, which stems from this state’s attempt to preempt a power that the Constitution delegates to the federal government. Specifically, Arizona’s attempt to enforce immigration law, no matter how amended to mirror federal law, is unconstitutional. This, notwithstanding its admittedly persuasive argument that it was only trying enforce a national law that the federal government seems unwilling or unable to enforce.
(AG Holder’s ignorance of law is no excuse, The iPINIONS Journal, May 17, 2010)
No doubt Arizona, as well as other states, will continue to litigate this matter. But when all is said and done, I am convinced that even this conservative U.S. Supreme Court will uphold Judge Bolton’s ruling that the federal government enjoys plenary and exclusive powers to enact laws pertaining to immigration: period.
But this will only settle the legal side of this issue. Meanwhile, the political side might prove to be far more contentious. I rarely cite fellow political commentators on this weblog. But I was so impressed with the way Chris Mathews framed the politics involved in a commentary on his program Hardball last night that I think it’s worth citing her for your comprehensive edification:
Let me finish tonight with this federal injunction against the new Arizona immigration law.
First of all, it is a “killer” issue politically for the Democrats this fall and a huge windfall for the right. It will anger even those people who believe the Arizona law went too far. It will dramatize the main case raised by the Tea Party people: that the federal government in Washington has become too powerful, that the rights of the states have been terribly abridged.
I wish Americans were fair-minded about immigration. I wish the politicians were honest about it. The right panders by suggesting it would throw the millions of illegal immigrants out of the country – knowing full well that would be a catastrophe. The liberals refuse to get serious about enforcement.
The deal is there to be struck. Find a way for people who have made lives here to become full, assimilated Americans like every other immigrant over our history. Find a way to stop the illegal hiring of people who have no right to be in this country. Do both or get out of the way because only by doing both will there be a deal and without a deal this problem will grow and grow. The divide in the country will cut deeper and the only winners will be the exploiters – those interests who love this issue because the more heat it raises on illegal immigrants the more it cheapens their labor and delivers the vote – and that, too, is a fact.
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Oh wait, I have. See my 2006 commentary on the need for comprehensive immigration reform by clicking related link below.
Related commentaries:
AG Holder’s ignorance of law is no excuse
Comprehensive immigration reform
Montana says
“House Bill 2013” and “SB1070”
0 = Arizona
2 = USA/ Our Constitution/ We the People of the United States
This month of July 2010, our U.S. Federal courts have found the so called State of Arizona hate filled legislation namely “House Bill 2013” and “SB1070” Un-constitution (So much for the intellect of Jan Brewer, “Did you read the bills you signed?”). But we all know that they will go crying to the Supreme Court of the United States, please, please, please go. We will fight you in Arizona, any other state, and yes in Washington DC. We will not tire, we will not be silent and we will persevere, I promise you.
In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme of clans; the Baggers, Birthers and Blowhards (people who love to push their beliefs and hate on others while trying to take away the rights of those they just hate) and that’s who they need to extract from their party if they real want to win in November. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”.
It’s all about politics: Jan Brewer you were never elected to be Governor, but you have no problem trying to get elected on the back of undocumented workers, you loser (sure you may win but the long-term effects to your so called State is just beginning). Here is a partial list of your hate filled legislation;
1. S.B. 1070,
2. House Bill 2013
3. No permit conceal weapons law,
4. The famous Birthers law,
5. Banning Ethnic studies law,
6. Banning human-animal hybrid (aren’t most GOPers crossed with the Reptilian race?)
or are they just giving Laurence Gonzales, some great promotion material for his new book “Lucy”.
7. Could she be behind the Mural in Prescott, Arizona, ordered to be whiten,
8. On deck to pass, no citizenship to babies born to undocumented workers,
9. If she can read she should look up Arizona’s House Bill 2779 from two years ago (which was un-constitution and failed when legally challenged),
10. The boycotted Martin Luther King Day, what idiots don’t want another holiday? Yes, you guessed it Arizona.
Well Arizona, you can keep boycotting new holidays, passing hate filled legislation and the rest of our country will continue to challenge you in court of law and Boycott your so-called state.
Lets face it, no one can real believe anything that comes out of Brewer’s mouth, in an interview, this year, in an attempt to gain sympathy, she first said her father had died in Germany fighting the Nazi in World War II (which ended 1945) but of course we find out the truth that father was never in Germany and died in California in 1955. But we are suppose to believe everything else she says, right!
As they say in the World Cup: Gooooooooal!