Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

Wednesday, July 28, 2010 | 12:28 p.m. CDT; updated 12:51 p.m. CDT, Wednesday, July 28, 2010

PHOENIX — A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.

The overall law will still take effect Thursday, but without 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 parts 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 ruled that the controversial sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues.

The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law at 12:01 a.m. Thursday and protesters were planning a large demonstrations to speak out against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them their immigration status.

The volume of the protests will be likely be turned down a few notches because of the ruling by Bolton, a Clinton appointee who suddenly became a crucial figure in the immigration debate when she was assigned the seven lawsuits filed against the Arizona law.

Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona — the busiest illegal gateway into the country — to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants.

The opponents argued the law will lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.

"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."

The law was signed by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer in April and immediately revived the national debate on immigration, making it a hot-button issue in the midterm elections.

The law has inspired rallies in Arizona and elsewhere by advocates on both sides of the immigration debate. Some opponents have advocated a tourism boycott of Arizona.

It also led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave Arizona for other American states or their home countries.

Federal authorities who are trying to overturn the law have argued that letting the Arizona law stand would create a patchwork of immigration laws nationwide that would needlessly complicate the foreign relations of the United States. Federal lawyers said the law is disrupting U.S. relations with Mexico and other countries and would burden the agency that responds to immigration-status inquiries.

Brewer's lawyers said Arizona shouldn't have to suffer from America's broken immigration system when it has 15,000 police officers who can arrest illegal immigrants.

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Carlos Sanchez July 28, 2010 | 12:40 p.m.

How can a law be blocked if it is not enacted yet? I call foul on this judge's decision. That judge just hamstringed Arizona Law Enforcement and made a mockery out of the Federal Law.

When the next terrorist act occurs in the United States and the terrorists tell how they came through our wide open Southern Border and the fact nobody ever asked them for Legal Paperwork how will America feel then?

(Report Comment)
Thomas Baker July 28, 2010 | 1:04 p.m.

The Federal Government is thumbing it's nose at the majority of US citizens. Why is our state, which I have always thought would do whats right regardless, not passing emmigration laws and give the fed's something else to think about? Is this the peoples country, or does it belong to those ignorant jerks in DC that are trying every way they can to bring us down? If even our own state won't listen to us I guess we'll have to make our own laws and enforce them.

(Report Comment)
Ellis Smith July 28, 2010 | 3:06 p.m.

"Is this the people's country, or does it belong to those ignorant jerks in DC that are trying every way they can to bring us down?"

The core of the problem is that those "jerks" have it backwards: they seem think we work for them rather than that they're supposed to be working for us.

The situation runs far deeper than one political party or the other.

(Report Comment)
Carlos Sanchez July 28, 2010 | 4:26 p.m.

@Thomas Baker we do have a similar law on our Missouri Book. The question is others states do to but you do not see the Feds suing them do you and why?

I have a feeling the DOJ is suing Arizona because the Governor is a Republican.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.