Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Seminars

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Classifieds

Advertise

VIP Lawyer Network

EB-5

High Net Worth

Custom Content

Dubai Events

Find HNW People

Custom Events

Custom Services

Professional Services

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE




ilw.com VIP


The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-2014
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW

Rate this Entry

Here it is.




ARIZONA injuntion

Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to Facebook Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to Twitter Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to Google Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to StumbleUpon Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to Reddit Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to Digg Submit "JUDGE BLOCKS CONTROVERSIAL SECTIONS OF ARIZONA LAW" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. George Chell's Avatar
    It will lake a long time before it is resolved by the Supreme Court...by that time anti-immigrant forces would run out of money and they will find it tough to come after the legals as they are doing now in Australia, UK and Japan!
  2. Another Voice's Avatar
    Greg can you provide some plain English language analysis as to the meaning of the injunction and the specific parts that are and are not allowed for all of us here.
  3. Kyle's Avatar
    Thanks, Greg - Hot off the press!
  4. Tundra/Desert's Avatar
    I think the judge demonstrated superior skill in dealing with the issues by framing the ruling to not be about Arizona's right, or lack thereof, to deal with illegals, but about Arizona trampling on legal immigrants' rights in the process. Had Arizona's legislature been more thoughtful in crafting the bill, perhaps the intent of dealing with illegal immigration could have been served without threatening legal visitors and green card holders with indefinite detention. Unfortunately few of the antis seem to possess the brainpower to comprehend what the ruling is about; the debate has now steered even more into the "four legs good, two bad" area. Judge with immigrant, bad judge.

    Would Arizona's legislature now try to rewrite the bill, addressing the judge's concerns as much as possible, or stubbornly attempt to push through the current version? It seems that the judge's ruling left the door somewhat open for a version that would attempt to reach Arizona's goals stated in the preamble to SB 1070 without imposing the "distinct, unusual and extraordinary burden" on legals.
  5. USC's Avatar
    "Unfortunately few of the antis seem to possess the brainpower to comprehend what the ruling is about;"

    LOL! How true!

    In any event, the majority (USCs, who look European and speak English with a nasal accent) tried to protect itself from the illegals by stripping the minority (all other USCs) of their rights, all the while repeating "what part of illegal don't you understand" while it the same time indulging in highly illegal conduct.

    In a democracy the majority is not entitled to protect itself at the expense of the minority.
  6. Jim's Avatar
    "Would Arizona's legislature now try to rewrite the bill, addressing the judge's concerns as much as possible, or stubbornly attempt to push through the current version? It seems that the judge's ruling left the door somewhat open for a version that would attempt to reach Arizona's goals stated in the preamble to SB 1070 without imposing the "distinct, unusual and extraordinary burden" on legals."


    Being the first State to do it, it wouldn't matter much.

    Majority of the illegals and their legal family members and legal relatives has already left. They won't be going back to AZ even if there would be CIR.

    Majority of the damage has been done.

    If AZ re-writes the bill and use better language it would only affect the small numbers that chose not to leave.

    It is the 20 or so other States that are monitoring the event that will reap the benefits of crafting their version of the bill with better language.

Leave Comment Leave Comment
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: