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

WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW

Rate this Entry
Looks like the Administration is getting ready (finally) to argue that federal immigration law preempts Arizona from regulating immigration.

Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to Facebook Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to Twitter Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to Google Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to StumbleUpon Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to Reddit Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to Digg Submit "WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERING CHALLENGE TO ARIZONA LAW" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. Jim's Avatar
    This could be a long battle and even if they are able to do it in a relatively short amount of time other States could one by one pass similar laws of their own with new language that goes around any ruling against the original AZ bill and them claiming that it's different from the AZ bill.

    Best thing to do is to just undercut all of these is by passing CIR.

  2. Jack's Avatar
    "Arizona's new law is subject to potential abuse, Holder told a news conference."

    Every law is subject to potential abuse. Pretext stops are legal in this country but suddenly there's a hullabaloo when immigration law is what might be enforced that way. If this is the only context you're protesting, you might just be against immigration law and discovered the Fourth Amendment out of political expediency.
  3. George Chell's Avatar
    "Every law is subject to potential abuse. Pretext stops are legal in this country but suddenly there's a hullabaloo when immigration law is what might be enforced that way. If this is the only context you're protesting, you might just be against immigration law and discovered the Fourth Amendment out of political expediency."

    That is for the judges to decide, not you, not citizens of Arizona and not even Mr. Siskind or me...and by the way the recent events in NY clearly shows that white skin worshipping folks in Arizona are more intrested in harrassing Christian Hispanics because of their skin color over the folks who are truly a deadly threat to American society. That is what bigotry and racism does to a socitey!
  4. Another Voice's Avatar
    "Pretext stops are legal in this country but suddenly there's a hullabaloo when immigration law is what might be enforced that way. If this is the only context you're protesting, you might just be against immigration law and discovered the Fourth Amendment out of political expediency."

    It does not seem that way Jack, not if the decision to stop people is merely based on their appearance or the assumption of national origin before they are stopped.

    I guess you would count racial profiling as specific information...

    he Fourth Amendment specifies that any warrant must be judicially sanctioned for a search or an arrest, in order for such a warrant to be considered reasonable. Warrants must be supported by probable cause and be limited in scope according to specific information.

    In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court has also ruled that certain searches and seizures violated the Fourth Amendment even when a warrant was properly granted.
  5. Adi's Avatar
    "Best thing to do is to just undercut all of these is by passing CIR."

    Amen to that. If it does not happen this year then it will be 2013 before its picked up. Obama has really disappointed on his lack of initiatives for CIR. And this is after Americans are not against it.

    Recent USA today polls show that Americans hugely favor border control and legal status for illegal immigrants.
    http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-05-03-immigration-poll_N.htm

  6. Jack's Avatar
    "not if the decision to stop people is merely based on their appearance or the assumption of national origin before they are stopped."

    Right, that is illegal. Under the new AZ law, the decision to stop has to be based on something other than unlawful presence. Suspicion of unlawful presence cannot be the basis of the stop:

    "any lawful contact stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency...in the enforcement of any *other* [emphasis added] law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States"

    When it comes to stops, check out Terry v. Ohio or "Terry stop" and for pretext, Whren v. U.S.
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: