Supreme Court upholds key part of Arizona immigration law

Breaking News hot off the press...

The Supreme Court rebuffed the Obama administration's law suit and upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-upholds-key-part-arizona-immigration-law-141927514.html

Now if they could just get the Feds to enforce their laws, the problems might start to decline. Colorado badly needs this law too.

Next up - Obamacare. But it won't be today.

BearMtnHIB wrote: Breaking News hot off the press...

The Supreme Court rebuffed the Obama administration's law suit and upheld a key part of Arizona's tough anti-illegal immigration law on Monday that allows police officers to ask about immigration status during stops. That part of the law, which never went into effect because of court challenges, will now immediately be enforced in Arizona.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/supreme-court-upholds-key-part-arizona-immigration-law-141927514.html

Now if they could just get the Feds to enforce their laws, the problems might start to decline. Colorado badly needs this law too.

Next up - Obamacare. But it won't be today.

It's a hollow victory...

"Basically, the Supreme Court decision on SB1070 will allow the stop-and-check provision to take effect, but leave open the possibility that a case showing actual harm could be used to challenge the law at a later date." [/b][/i]

Yes, and apparently killed three other provisions, and gutted it...

The provision that was upheld -- at least for now -- also commands police to check all arrestees' immigration status with the federal government before they are released.

The court gave the Obama administration a victory by striking three other challenged provisions as stepping on federal prerogatives. Two of them made it a crime for undocumented immigrants to be present and to seek employment in Arizona, while a third authorized police officers to make warrantless arrests of anyone they had probable cause to believe had committed a deportable offense.

I guess it's all in your spin....er, perception....

If it discourges illegals then it's a good law.

But yes- apparently it's not a crime to be present in a state illegally. Don't know why this could not be a state crime because it's a federal crime- plus they comitted a crime just crossing the border without permission.

Murder is a federal crime, and also a state crime. Robbery is a federal crime, and a state crime.

Possession of Pot is a federal crime, and is also a state crime.

The third one- warrantless arrests of anyone they had probable cause to believe had committed a deportable offense- I probably would not have gone along with that one myself.

I'm thinking the supreme court are a bunch of wussies these days.

The way I see it, Arizona saves money by NOT making it a state law. They can detain the illegal, contact the Feds and let the Feds deal with the details and real expenses of long term incarceration or deportation.

It would be neat if the Feds would just uphold existing laws on illegal immigrants really. Don't you think?

It would be neat if the Feds would just uphold existing laws on illegal immigrants really. Don't you think?

Damn straight. But don't expect that to happen until we replace this Socialist we have in the white house.

I agree... The Feds need to do a better job.

However, this isn't the end of the litigation. The whole law was put on-hold until it was settled before the Supreme Court. One of the reasons was the fear that the one part (out of four) that wasn't found unconstitutional would lead to racial profiling. Since the law wasn't being enforced, there were no lawsuits alleging racial profiling. Now that the law WILL be enforced, you can bet that there will be some racial-profiling cases in the near future. One of those is bound to end up in the SCOTUS again, and when it does, then it may get further limited on what the cops can do.

For the record, I'm NOT "pro-illegal immigrant"...I'm anti-profiling...

Oh, and you can take that "Socialist" stuff and cram it up the usual orifice...

Since the law wasn't being enforced, there were no lawsuits alleging racial profiling. Now that the law WILL be enforced, you can bet that there will be some racial-profiling cases in the near future.

The supreme court can simply refuse to hear the case- as they have done on hundreds of other cases.

They are likely to be accused of profiling- but if it comes down to some idiot who won't show ID- or dosn't have a drivers liscense - that person will be charged with other violations.

I think the state has a right to verify a persons legal status here no matter what- so if it goes to court, we will see if a state has that right. I think they do.

They could have refused to hear the Arizona case in the first place...but they didn't. It won't be a matter of checking ID's and citizenship...It will come down to whether or not the stop was based on "Driving While Hispanic" in the first place...And you can bet they will...

Democracy4Sale wrote: They could have refused to hear the Arizona case in the first place...but they didn't. It won't be a matter of checking ID's and citizenship...It will come down to whether or not the stop was based on "Driving While Hispanic" in the first place...And you can bet they will...

Well... it will be a matter of checking ID's and citizenship... since the STOTUS said they could. Someone will have to take them to court to try to prove the traffic stop was "driving while Hispanic." This will be an aid in discovering certain illegals. I'm quite sure advocates of immigration control will find this to be another tool in their scant bag of tricks.

You loose.