AZ court hearing SB 1070 legal challenges today

[gabosaurus]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html

[Trigg]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html

Exactly what is your problem with the bill?????

It is very close to the Federal law......

Do you simply disagree with the state taking matters into it's own hands?

[darin]

Your cousin's husband who is an attorney will lose in a bad way. Maybe he's looking for publicity?

[country]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html

Nothing personal, but I hope he loses. Obama and Holder need to be put in their place by the judge. Probably one of their judges though.

[HogTrash]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.htmlI just hope my tax dollars aren't paying your cousin-in-law's salary for defending these foreign criminals who broke into my country like a thief in the night.

Hows this for an illegal alien deterent?

Any Illegal Alien who gets caught here gets a big IA branded on their right cheek with a hot iron and taken to the nearest Port of Entry and released.

The second time they get caught they get a big IA branded on their left cheek with a hot iron and taken to the nearest Port of Entry and released.

A third time offender will be considered incorrigible and fed alive to the carnivores in one of our nations many zoos...Illegal alien problem solved.

The American taxpayers are spared most of the burden of expenses for deportation, incarceration, or death penalty and burial expenses. :laugh2:

[avatar4321]

Not sure that they have any sort of change at winning.

[SassyLady]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html

Why?

[sybarite]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html

I hope he fails.............miserably! Anyone who stands up for criminals who flaunt their crimes in the face of the American people they are bankrupting, deserves to fail.

[Binky]

The way I look at it is if any illegal gets caught here he or she should be enlisted into a branch of our armed forces and sent to fight in Iraq and Afghanstan. Since we're footing the bill for them anyway so they may as well pay us back with their service to our country....... Can you envision the blanket parties?

[Binky]

My cousin's husband, who is an immigration attorney, is among those presenting legal briefs challenging SB 1070 today in a court in Phoenix.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html



That is so typical.......:eek: And why doesn't this come as a surprise to me? Tell me something Gabs, how did you think people would react to that statement? And since you always feel the need to blurt out things such as that, you are doomed to receive the blacklash that is aimed and lands on you. Sometimes it pays to keep ones thoughts to themselves. But then, it's giving you attention. Maybe that is what you seek. The attention the shock factor affords you. Who knows?

[DragonStryk72]

Nothing personal, but I hope he loses. Obama and Holder need to be put in their place by the judge. Probably one of their judges though.

Oh, you didn't read the article? The judge has been cutting off the federal lawyers


Omar Jadwat, an attorney representing the ACLU, had just begun to say why he believed SB 1070 was unconstitutional and should be enjoined, when Bolton cut him off.

"I'm sorry to interrupt you after your second sentence," she said.

But she wanted to make it clear that SB 1070 was not a statute in itself, but rather an "enactment" by the Legislature that merged new laws with old laws and amended laws, all dealing with immigration.

"Shouldn't we be talking about it section by section and provision by provision?" she asked. "Because I'm not going to enjoin SB 1070."

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/11/20100711arizona-immigration-law-justic-department.html#ixzz0uWApccmU


I actually like this judge, she's not taking any of the idiotic crap that goes on in some court cases.

[gabosaurus]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

[Trigg]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

So, if they change the law to say that EVERYONE is questioned, you would have no problem with it???

I could agree with that change. It's fair and gets rid of any assumptions of racial profilling

[Gaffer]

You might not be an American if....

You don't speak English.

[DragonStryk72]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

No you don't, quit lying. You pray they don't have the funds for the defense.

As to your lawyer, what he's saying is, "Well, we can't actually find anything particularly wrong with the law, and it within the constitutional standards and all, but we're gonna sandbag it anyhow."

[SassyLady]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

This may be a stupid question .... but, how many people who are stopped by cops for something are not asked for their I.D.? I still haven't figured out this one .... example: cop stops a jaywalker and decides to give them a ticket. He asks for their I.D. ..... and bingo ... they are either legal and have I.D. or they don't have I.D. and they go to jail.

How is this law going to change that?

[Mr. P]

You might not be an American if....

You don't speak English.

Profilin, Huh?!! Carry on !!!! :salute:

[namvet]

wonder why Osama has never been to AZ ????

[Little-Acorn]

If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone.

Keep in mind that little gabby is a blinders-on liberal fanatic.

She wants very much for police to be going around demanding "Your papers, please!" of EVERYONE.

[sybarite]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

To become a citizen of this country you have to pass an English Proficiency Test. If an officer asks you for I.D. and you need an interpreter to understand what he is saying, chances are you are illegal!

An illegal immigrant just killed a 70 year old man in my state, in a car accident. This person had no idea what the officer was saying to her until they brought in a translator. Needless to say she had no license and should not have been on the highway in the first place, but she didn't care. Why should she care about the law? She's not legal in the first place.

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20100722/GPG0101/7220531/Update-Cornelius-VanHandel-dies-after-U-S-41-crash

[gabosaurus]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

[red states rule]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

It will be overturned on appeal Gabby. This judge said being an illegal is illegal - but the state can't enforce an existing Federal law????

This is a major factor as to why your state is going broke. The cost of illegals continues to grow and YOU seem to be wiling to continue to pay, and pay, and pay for it

[SassyLady]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

So?

If stats say that the majority of illegals in this country are of a specific nationality .... then why wouldn't our law enforcement be on the lookout for that profile?

What do you think police are doing when they start profiling a serial killer ... they start by looking at white males in their 20s or 30s.......so, tell me again why profiling is wrong?

[red states rule]

http://tjmichaelsshow.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/illegal1.jpg

[CockySOB]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

Odd. The way I read the decision was more along the lines of "allowing AZ to enforce their state law would create an undue burden on the Federal government in enforcing their own regulations." This comes dangerously close to putting the policies of POTUS (not enforcing border security) ahead of state sovereignty and the duty of state officials to protect their citizenry.

I expect the AZ legislature to move rapidly to amend SB 1070 to address some of the judge's verbiage concerns ("must check" to "may check", etc.) And I expect that the preemption argument is at best a 50-50 proposition after arguments have been heard and appeals processed.

[namvet]

as long as all the illegals go to mexifornia im happy. its a welfare state anyway. let them pay for it. better them than us

[CockySOB]

as long as all the illegals go to mexifornia im happy. its a welfare state anyway. let them pay for it. better them than us

... as long as the rest of the country doesn't have to bail out California's fiscal mess.

[namvet]

... as long as the rest of the country doesn't have to bail out California's fiscal mess.

snif...........I smell revolution :thumb:

[Trigg]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

so they change it so that EVERYONES status is checked. Problem solved.

[DragonStryk72]

Susie Baker, 53, who remodels homes in Tucson, felt differently. "I am thrilled," she said as she headed into the store. "I think Jan Brewer is out of her mind. She is bringing harm to Arizona."

Baker said she often hires Latinos on home projects, and doesn't ask them their immigration status.

I loved this part, that the LA Times was so hard up to find someone who disagreed with the law that they had to go to someone who was a contributing part of the problem. Of course the people who are hiring day laborers with no thought to whether they are citizens or not are going to have issue with being taken to task on it.

[red states rule]

The challenge to SB 1070 have been SUCCESSFUL!! Apparently the lawyers involved in the case (my cousin's husband included) were able to convince the presiding judge that the current legislation relies too heavily on racial profiling.

http://www.latimes.com/la-na-arizona-immigration-20100729,0,3606702.story

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sk080110dAPR20100730034700.jpg

[LuvRPgrl]

The suit that my cousin's husband has helped file does not challenge SB 1070 itself. Only challenges how it is enforced.
Currently, law enforcement is allowed to question people based on their perception of who might be an illegal immigrant. Factors could include language spoken, how the person is dressed and where their vehicle is registered.
If his challenge is upheld, law enforcement will be required to question the legal status of everyone. Otherwise, enforcement would be discriminatory and thus illegal.
A precedent is in current state border crossings between Texas and New Mexico and NM/Arizona. There is a checkpoint where they ask everyone if they are U.S. citizens.

I certainly hope Arizona has enough in its state treasury to defend the dozen or more challenges now on tap for SB 1070. The state is currently considering requesting federal aid to defend itself. Which I hope the Obama administration would laugh heartily at.

Its possible AZ could file suit when its all said and done to make the feds pay for their legal bills. The city of Torrance in LA county did that and succeded.

Cities would simply capitulate to the feds on demands of racial hiring quotas in police dept's because of the cost of defending themsselves was too high. Torrance fought the feds in court and won, then won the case following forcing the feds to pay all their legal expenses.

[LuvRPgrl]

Profilin, Huh?!! Carry on !!!! :salute:

You might not be Mexican if you speak the queens english,,

think about it :))))

[LuvRPgrl]

... as long as the rest of the country doesn't have to bail out California's fiscal mess.

Hey, we gave you Reagan

[namvet]

we have a dictator in the WH that won't go to AZ for fear they will force him to produce a BC:laugh2: