ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




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

View RSS Feed

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS

Rate this Entry
I'll have more to say on this once I get the ruling.

Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to Facebook Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to Twitter Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to Google Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to StumbleUpon Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to Reddit Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to Digg Submit "ARIZONA JUDGE'S DECISION EXPECTED IN NEXT FEW HOURS" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. My 2 cents's Avatar
    Even though SB 1070 is unconstitutional, I hope the judge rules in favor of AZ to get the WH & the Dems back on track for immigration reform. It would cause misery but the end result (CIR if enacted) would be sweet for all.
  2. Jim's Avatar
    Whether the ruling is positive, negative or mixed the damage has been done already.

    Like I said a couple of months ago, as soon as The AZ Governor signs it rink into law it would be doing it's damage regardless of any legal suit and if that suit even wins.

    Many have left AZ already both legal and illegal. Some small businesses had closed already as well or on the brink of it because of the exodus.

    Even if all or majority of the provisions are overturned, it would not matter anymore. The people that left and will be leaving will never be going back. Same with the businesses that closed.


  3. My 2 cents's Avatar
    Breaking news: AP reports that the judge has blocked controversial sections of SB 1070, so it's still a win for AZ & loss for DOJ & the WH.
  4. USC's Avatar
    The people have won. AP news alert on my iPhone "Judge blocks controversial section of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect."

    Greg, I know you use the iPhone, if you haven't already downloaded the AP app, I highly recoomend it.
  5. Another Voice's Avatar
    Judge Blocks Parts of Arizona Immigration Law
    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Published: July 28, 2010
    SIGN IN TO E-MAIL
    PRINT

    Filed at 1:16 p.m. ET

    PHOENIX (AP) -- A judge has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona's new immigration law from taking effect Thursday, handing a major legal victory to opponents of the crackdown.

    The law will still take effect Thursday, but without many of the provisions that angered opponents -- including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws. The judge also put on hold a part of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.

    U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton put those controversial sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.

    Opponents say the law will lead to racial profiling and is trumped by federal immigration
  6. My 2 cents's Avatar
    Even though the controversial sections were blocked, the DOJ expected the judge to block the law in entirety. That hasn't happened & just as Jim pointed out the damage has been done. Now this issue will drag on in courts for many months. I hope Obama is jolted by the court's decision & is ready to handle the "third rail" of US politics at the earliest before the other 20 some states sign similar bills into law.
  7. USC's Avatar
    "so it's still a win for AZ & loss for DOJ & the WH."

    No. It's actually a pretty comprehensive win for the USA. The people asked for an injunction against Sections 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6. They got 2, 3, 4 & 6. Decision linked below:

    http://www.azd.uscourts.gov/azd/courtinfo.nsf/983700DFEE44B56B0725776E005D6CCB/$file/10-1413-87.pdf?openelement
  8. My 2 cents's Avatar
    USC, it may be a win for DOJ, the law prohibits the undocumented from soliciting employment in public places which is a big loss for the undocumented. This clause is enough for the illegals to leave AZ in droves which basically was the whole premise of SB 1070.
  9. Jim's Avatar
    "This clause is enough for the illegals to leave AZ in droves which basically was the whole premise of SB 1070. "

    Exactly. Pearce, et al and everyone who had a hand on it's passage and ultimate signing into law by the AZ Governor knew that the whole bill or parts if it may be blocked but it will still be a win for them if it drives the illegals out anyhow w/c what happened already with the exodus.

    They won half the battle already when the AZ Governor signed it into law. Does not matter if all or parts of it are going to be blocked. Once people leave, the probability of them going back is going to be low even CIR is to be enacted in the future since public sentiment and the atmosphere would just be unbearable.

    That's also the beauty of being the first State to do it. Whether the bill is overturned or not they will be driving the illegals out to other States such as NM.

    However, what they probably have not accounted for is that they maybe successful in driving out illegals but the drug traffickers or mules will still be going through AZ no matter what. Not to mention, it drove out legals as well whose immediate family or relatives are illegals.

    What they did is simply drive out illegals and relatives and family that are legal that just wants to work (and the small businesses that caters to them) but the drug mules and other undesirables will still go through their borders no matter what specially if the provision for local police to ask for immigration status & to always carry documents is blocked.
  10. USC's Avatar
    "USC, it may be a win for DOJ, the law prohibits the undocumented from soliciting employment in public places which is a big loss for the undocumented."

    I apologize for my confusing language. In an attempt to lighten up the conversation I often use terms like "the People to refer to the USA", the Hate State for Arizona, INS for the USCIS, Cans for the Republicans. So, when I said "the peopl"e I should have capitalized "People" meaning a win for the USA (DoJ) and when I used "people" I wasn't referring to the illegals or even anyone else. The use of the term "People" was only a reference to legal jargon where criminal cases are titled "The People v OJ Simpson."

    To me this case has never been about the illegals but about the USCs and LPRs that would be discriminated against under this law. I am pleased that the Judge has raised the very concerns about natural born USCs not being verifiable and being arrested for jay walking that I pointed out to forum Jack.

    Judge Bolton has essentially gutted this law and I wonder if Arizona is going to waste more taxpayer money by appealing this or if they are going to have the good sense to recognize that they lost fair and square.
  11. Adi's Avatar
    "Even though the controversial sections were blocked, the DOJ expected the judge to block the law in entirety. "

    Don't be so quick. It is temporary block. Judge Bolton is not so much in favor of DoJ arguments.

    Check this article for few of her comments:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/29/us/29arizona.html

    "But she seemed reluctant to accept that local police making the inquiry intruded on federal authority. "
    "Where is the preemption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?"
    "Why can't Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?"
  12. My 2 cents's Avatar
    USC, I knew you were referring to the DoJ when mentioning "people". But it's a bitter day for the illegals & the legals who have illegal family members. I fear the other states in waiting for similar laws could come up with better language in the bill to dodge the DoJ.
  13. Jim's Avatar
    "I fear the other states in waiting for similar laws could come up with better language in the bill to dodge the DoJ. "

    Yep. That's exactly what is going to happen. That's the beauty of being the late comers as oppose to being the first like AZ w/c has it's advantages as well.
  14. USC's Avatar
    "I wonder if Arizona is going to waste more taxpayer money by appealing this or if they are going to have the good sense to recognize that they lost fair and square."

    "Check this article for few of her comments:"

    Looks like I was too optimistic:

    "Lawyers for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican who signed the law and is campaigning on it for election, were expected to appeal, and legal experts predict the case is bound for the United States Supreme Court."

    In any event, the Supreme Court does concern me, we have argueably the worst four justices serving on the Supreme Court and let us not forget that it was during the Chinese Exclusion Act that the SCOTUS established the immoral,undemocratic doctrine of Consular Non-Reviewability and it is that single doctrine that enables low level tyrannical FSOs to terrorize NIV and IV applicants all over the world. It is sad that a doctrine that was invented during such a xenophobic era has still not been re-visited by Congress.
  15. USC's Avatar
    For those impacted by adverse Consular decisions the following links might be of interest. The first are quotes from a decision by the DC District Court and the second is an article by a lawyer for lawyers on how to challenge this infamous doctrine.

    http://lw.bna.com/lw/19980929/980252.htm

    "Lem Moon Sing addressed a now defunct immigration act in which Congress expressly precluded review of consular decisions, but the judge-made doctrine of consular nonreviewability arose from that case and its progeny and has since been widely adopted and recognized...............The APA's presumption that agency action is reviewable may render the doctrine of consular nonreviewability anomalous, see Pena, 409 F.Supp. at 1186, but the Supreme Court's modern acceptance of the doctrine in Mandel and Fiallo suggests that reports of the doctrine's death are greatly exaggerated."

    http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/files/articledobkin1.pdf



  16. USC's Avatar
    "Exactly. Pearce, et al and everyone who had a hand on it's passage and ultimate signing into law by the AZ Governor knew that the whole bill or parts if it may be blocked but it will still be a win for them if it drives the illegals out anyhow w/c what happened already with the exodus."

    It would appear that the Hate State suffers more than the illegals. Arizona economy teters:

    http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/07/28/arizona.immigration.economy/?hpt=T2#fbid=qgAKiDTW5S_
  17. Jim's Avatar
    "It would appear that the Hate State suffers more than the illegals. Arizona economy teters:"

    Exactly. Small businesses such as those from the article you've posted suffers.

    However, read some of the comments on that same article. It appears that some people have no clue on the effects on AZ's economy would be and some are even making excuses such as the Federal Gov't subsidizing their small businesses anyway and they won't exist in the first place w/o those.

    The Nebraska town w/ a similar ordinance is now considering thinking of not enforcing anything to save money. I bet you it's not only of saving $$$ to defend the law but they are weary of the over-all impact of the law to their local economy as well when small businesses gets affected.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/07/27/national/main6716885.shtml

    Hopefully, some the 20 or so States thinking about a similar bill as the AZ bill will see what this Nebraska town is seeing as well. It just simply hurts you more and not worth the money. Unless, of course they want to find it out the hard way just like how AZ found out.

  18. Montana's Avatar
    "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!
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: