Skip to comments.High court's stance could spur immigration laws
Posted on 04/28/2012 9:30:36 AM PDT by SmithL
Emboldened by signals that the U.S. Supreme Court may uphold parts of Arizona's immigration law, legislators and activists across the country say they are gearing up to push for similar get-tough measures in their states.
"We're getting our national network ready to run with the ball, and saturate state legislatures with versions of the law," said William Gheen, president of Americans for Legal Immigration. "We believe we can pass it in most states."
That goal may be a stretch, but lawmakers in about a dozen states told The Associated Press they were interested in proposing Arizona-style laws if its key components are upheld by the Supreme Court. A ruling is expected in June on the Department of Justice's appeal that the law conflicts with federal immigration policy.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said he was encouraged that several justices suggested during Wednesday's oral arguments that they are ready to let Arizona enforce the most controversial part of its law - a requirement that police officers check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally. Another provision allows suspected illegal immigrants to be arrested without warrants
"The justices sent a clear signal that there's a huge zone for state action in this area," Stein said. "There will be an enormous amount of energy spent in next few months examining the full range of possibilities."
For starters, a ruling in favor of Arizona's Senate Bill 1070 would likely enable Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah to put move forward with comparable measures that were enacted but have been on hold pending the high court's decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
It’s interesting how the citizens and the states are the prime movers in this article but the Feds are mostly the wrong-headed, absent parents.
When it comes right down to it, isn’t Arizona’s SB1070 really “immigration reform”?
I suspect this will be one of many watershed moments that cause progressive heads to explode.
IMO, never going to happen. Regardless of their lip service and posturing during the hearing, SCOTUS will shoot down the AZ law.
“Its interesting how the citizens and the states are the prime movers in this article but the Feds are mostly the wrong-headed, absent parents.”
Exactly. The federales (whether a Republican or Dim administration) refuse to enforce the law and they don’t intend to let anyone else enforce it either.
If AZ S.B. 1070 is upheld, it will be a win for Americans right up there with the striking down of ObummerCare.
WE here in SE Ohio have seen a dramatic decrease in spanish speaking people out in stores like we used to see after Ohio made it so 3rd parties could not register cars for anyone else.Now you have to do it yourself with license and proof of insurance in hand.No registration/insurance no plates.
Yada, yada, yada. If the states were all in get-tough mode, they’d have done it decades ago.
I agree. It’s almost comical how some took Sotomayor’s allegedly tough questioning of the Solicitor as indicating that she might actually vote to uphold the law. There is no way she will vote to uphold.
And I’m afraid neither will Kennedy, which will make it a 4-4 tie, which means the kangaroo 9th Circuit’s decision striking down the law will stand. If so it could be devastating. One of the more interesting things about the recent report claiming net immigration from Mexico has halted is how the number of illegals in Arizona dropped even more than average. This proves the effectiveness of laws like this, and that’s why the Left is so desperate to fight such laws. And as usual when they want something that the public would never voluntarily go along with (68% favor the Arizona law), they will get it from the Sup Court.
This is good news! Hopefully the SCOTUS will do it’s part for sensible border control.
Interesting! I didn’t know there was such a thing as 3rd party registration of vehicles.
Both Parties in DC are owned by internationalists - citizens of the world. They want open borders for global ideological reasons.
The States and people have not embraced globalism’s ultimate plan. Maybe the courts have not totally abandoned the constitution’s tenth amendment with the elitists.