Image 01 Image 03

SB 1070 oral argument at Supreme Court Wednesday

SB 1070 oral argument at Supreme Court Wednesday

SB 1070, the Arizona immigration law, is on for oral argument tomorrow at the U.S. Supreme Court.  Justice Elena Kagan recused herself.  If there is a 4-4 split, the 9th Circuit decision enjoining key part of the law stands.

My prior posts for some background:

Here is a summary of the issues from the Immigration Policy Center:

Q:  Which provisions of SB 1070 will the Supreme Court consider?

The Supreme Court will not rule on the entirety of SB 1070; it will only consider the provisions of SB 1070 temporarily enjoined by the federal district court in Phoenix.

• Section 2(B) requires state and local police officers to attempt to determine the immigration status of any person stopped under state or local law if “reasonable suspicion” exists that the person is unlawfully present in the United States. (Note: “reasonable suspicion” means having a valid reason to suspect unlawful activity, but not enough evidence to make an arrest.) This section also requires state and local authorities to determine the immigration status of any person placed under arrest, regardless of whether the person is suspected of being in the country unlawfully.

• Section 3 makes it a crime under Arizona law for unauthorized immigrants to violate the provisions of federal law requiring them to apply for “registration” with the federal government and to carry a registration card if one has been issued to them. Violations of this provision are punishable by up to 20 days in jail for a first violation and 30 days in jail for subsequent violations.

• Section 5(C) makes it a crime under Arizona law for immigrants who are not authorized to work in the United States to apply for work, solicit work in a public place, or perform work within the state’s borders. The term “solicit” means any form of communication, including a gesture or nod, indicating that a person is willing to be employed. Violations of this provision are punishable by up to six months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

• Section 6 authorizes state and local police officers to arrest immigrants without a warrant where “probable cause” exists that they committed a public offense making them removable from the United States. (Note: “probable cause” means having enough evidence of unlawful activity to obtain a warrant or make an arrest.) Under the provision, Arizona law enforcement officers may arrest lawfully present immigrants for crimes committed outside the state, or for crimes for which they
were previously incarcerated, if the commission of such a crime is grounds for deportation.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


As statutory drafting goes, these were pretty well written.

I get that there are some “supremacy” issues, but where the Feds are leaving the field fallow, I don’t see any conflict.

This is simply mind boggling… The federal government refuses to fulfill its responsibility and yet the states cannot take up the slack according to Holder.

In this case, a “strong majority” exists for public support of the Arizona law along with other states that have taken similar action.

I see only one solution to issue… Vote to serve eviction notices to all in this administration that has played us for fools for the past three and a half years!

Professor, I don’t understand. Kagan recused herself from this case because she was Solicitor General at the time. Nobody blinks an eye at that. Why didn’t she recuse herself for Obamacare–she was also SG at the time. I ask in all seriousness–I don’t understand why there is recusal in one case, but not the other.

    katiejane in reply to herm2416. | April 24, 2012 at 7:15 pm

    Maybe they want a 4-4 split? That way it reverts to the lower court position, and the SC doesn’t have to actually incur the wrath of the Dems?

    Milhouse in reply to herm2416. | April 24, 2012 at 11:18 pm

    Because she claims that she deliberately did not work on 0bamacare, and kept herself out of the loop in anticipation of possibly ending up where she is now. I don’t believe her, but I don’t see how anyone could possibly prove it.

the AZ law basically said its also a state crime if you are breaking the federal law. and people went nuts.
fed law already reqs aliens to carry documents and be able to produce them on demand.
1070 just said, yeah we agree with that and will enforce it.

feds say you can’t enforce our laws….while sending tons of money to every states DEA agencies to allow them to do the feds jobs.

BannedbytheGuardian | April 24, 2012 at 8:46 pm

Sorry this whole ‘Walk Right in…. Sit Right Down ‘ illegal immigrant thing is ridiculous .

I do not know of anywhere in the world that this is accepted.