Breaking: Judge blocks parts of AZ immigration law; Update: Pre-emption wins, for now

posted at 1:31 pm on July 28, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Federal judge Susan Bolton has issued a temporary restraining order against the most controversial portions of the Arizona immigration-enforcement law, while keeping much of it in place.  The requirement for police to check immigration status has been suspended, however, pending a full review by the court at a later date:

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.

A temporary injunction gets put into place when a judge thinks that a court review has some likelihood of overturning a law in a full hearing.  That doesn’t amount to a decision on the merits, but it does indicate that Bolton thinks the Department of Justice can make a case for blocking the law.

What will be interesting will be to see whether this impacts public opinion.  The Obama administration has taken a beating in the polls on this issue, with poll after poll showing majorities of Americans supporting the Arizona law.  A temporary injunction on portions of the bill may get some people rethinking the issue, but I’d be surprised if there was any substantial movement. If a judge later rules against the law after a full hearing, it might change feelings about the law specifically, but probably not about enforcement.

I’d also expect the White House to claim this as vindication, but only because they have been utterly tone-deaf on this issue for the last three months.  They should wait on the I-told-you-so for the full hearing.

Update: This point seems key.  On page 14, Bolton says that the law as written would require law enforcement to check immigration status on everyone arrested or held, not just those with “reasonable suspicion” of being illegal immigrants.  That would create a huge burden on both law enforcement and on legal immigrants, Bolton writes.

Also, on page 17, Bolton appears to buy the argument that a large influx of referrals from Arizona to the ICE would have the effect of pre-empting federal policies on national security and immigration:

For these reasons, the United States has demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on its claim that the mandatory immigration verification upon arrest requirement contained in Section 2(B) of S.B. 1070 is preempted by federal law. This requirement, as stated above, is likely to burden legally-present aliens, in contravention of the Supreme Court’s directive in Hines that aliens not be subject to “the possibility of inquisitorial practices and police surveillance.” 312 U.S. at 74. Further, the number of requests that will emanate from Arizona as a result of determining the status of every arrestee is likely to impermissibly burden federal resources and redirect federal agencies away from the priorities they have established.

And again on pages 20-21:

In combination with the impermissible burden this provision will place on lawfully-present aliens, the burden on federal resources and priorities also leads to an inference of preemption. Therefore, for the purposes of preliminary injunction analysis, the Court concludes that the United States has demonstrated a likelihood of success on its challenge to the first sentence of Section 2(B). Section 2(B) in its entirety is likely preempted by federal law.

Basically, Bolton seems to feel that the DoJ will win in court on these issues, or at least has a strong case.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 7

Count it!

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:32 PM

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times,

Although for at least fifty years, federal law has required them to carry their green cards at all times.

Wethal on July 28, 2010 at 1:33 PM

LOL

Obama doesn’t realize he’s in a lose/lose situation.

ButterflyDragon on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

I say AZ goes directly to US Supreme court to get this resolved, or goes ahead and enforces the law, and let the chips fall where they may

ConservativePartyNow on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Another dart in the lefties chest come November

Wade on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Dang! It was working already too.

Deckard on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Foolishness triumphs…for now.

itsnotaboutme on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.

Once again… The Obama Admin is standing against the American people!

jeffn21 on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times

while the rest of us whitey-gringo-racists have to carry our licenses, registrations, insurance cards, etc.

Fair is fair depending on the color of your skin.

VibrioCocci on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

So how does that affect federal law that already requires aliens of any type to carry their papers with them at all times anywhere they travel in the US?

Youngs98 on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

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.

So there’s actually a law somewhere that says that only the federal government can impose “distinct, unusual, and extraordinary” burdens on aliens?

David Shane on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

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.

Which implies they can do that optionally.

Is the remainder of the law intact which allows Arizona to deport based on immigration status? If that’s left in place along with the optional check… I don’t think we have a problem…

Skywise on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Illegal immigration, good. Enforcing the law, illegal?

We’re not in Kansas anymore are we?

El_Terrible on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

States have no rights to protect themselves…we must rely upon the Feds to protect us…oh, yeah.

d1carter on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

It’s Time To Deport Congress! per Rush

crazywater on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Damn – keep at it Gov. Brewer. You will win in the long run

gophergirl on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

But, but but….according to HA, the judge “scoffed” at the DoJ’s preemption arguments last week!?!?

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

TROs are appealable. Expect to see this go up quickly.

SWLiP on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Is Obummer going to sue Rhode Island now too? And while the Ninth Circuit won’t be any more a favorable stop for Jan Brewer, the Supreme Court definitely will be.

A ruling on an injunction is immediately appealable, and I bet you a notice of appeal has already been filed and a request for expedited review already made.

ieplaya on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Sounds like she put a hold on all the parts that mattered. What’s left?

Cindy Munford on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Sweet, I actually like this. PBHO and the Domestic Terrorist Party get to keep immigration front and center right into November, twisting and turning and having to explain their position on the matter.

Bishop on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Had the decision gone the other way our resident legal trolls would be crowing about activist judges. I look forward to the SCOTUS picking this up and having Roberts et al giving Ms. Bolton a smackdown. Put that in your taco and smoke it.

ted c on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Will be ever able to enforce these laws….Death of a nation.

Oil Can on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

I saw on Fox a few minutes ago that this will go to the 9th court in CA asap to get a better ruling. The 9th is a real left court.
L

letget on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times,
Although for at least fifty years, federal law has required them to carry their green cards at all times.

Wethal on July 28, 2010 at 1:33 PM

Umm. Yeah. The judge is basically saying that no one has to carry any kind of papers coming across the border, which is entirely different that what the currently fed law requires

ConservativePartyNow on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

More wood for the November bonfire.

InterestedObserver on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Great, a Federal mandate to make Arizona a sanctuary state. We are destroying ourselves from within.

azkenreid on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times

I thought permanent resident aliens already had to carry their green card with them at all times.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

What was his objection? What does it say about the federal law?

Jewels on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

Not Required but still doable. Get the phuck out illegals or we will throw you out. WE THE PEOPLE!!!

Reality Checker on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

drip..drip…drip….drip….
Public faith in government eroding away.
I wonder when the damn breaks….

Canadian Infidel on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

It was working already too.

Deckard on July 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM

It did work. Just the threat of enforcement made them leave. Question is what happens from here on out.

El_Terrible on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Count it!

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Count the voters leaving your party.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Losing by winning.

the hurricane is gathering and this judge is not going to stop the curb stomping the Dems are going to suffer this November.

ted c on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

I think Obama and Holder just guaranteed the GOP retakes the House. It’s not wise to keep thumbing your nose at 2/3s of the American people on issue after issue.

Doughboy on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

What was blocked:

Judge blocked portion of law that makes it a crime for illegals to seek and perform work in Arizona (this is illegal in every state but Arizona now).

She blocks police from determining immigration status of someone detained or arrested (they have to wait for ICE to make determinations).

And she blocks making it a crime for not carrying your immigration papers (again, this is illegal by federal law in every state but Arizona now).

Enoxo on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

The judge is a coward. It seems that she put injunctions on the key parts of the law for cripe’s sake!

NavyMustang on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

si, se puede!

/s

cmsinaz on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

“Likely to succeed on the merits.” I still disagree. Will the Bush appointee hear the actual case?

LASue on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

We always knew this was going to end up in the Supreme Court, and that’s where our hope lies.

Darksean on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Rubbish!
This ruling has effectively rendered SB 1070 toothless.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

But, but but….according to HA, the judge “scoffed” at the DoJ’s preemption arguments last week!?!?

Because she did. Courts and judges can often “scoff” or dress down a party they ultimately rule in favor for during oral argument.

ieplaya on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

AZ to Judge.
“We no longer recognize your authority in this matter under the 10th amendment of the constitution. Please pass the popcorn for the fireworks.”

evilned on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

It is my understanding that the law only allows the police to detain someone whom they suspect may be here illegally due to the fact that they do not have valid identification or papers when being questioned by the police for a crime or violation.

ICE is then notified and they determine the legal status of the person.

Am I wrong in how I see this bill?

Jvette on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

To quote Andrew Jackson, “The judges have made their decision. Now let’s see them try to enforce it.”

Sgt Steve on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Ninth Circuit will hear the appeals…oh no.

d1carter on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Hopefully, this will convince people like Greta Van Susteren to finally cover the immigration issue in Arizona.

YYZ on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

Bring. It. On.

publiuspen on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

I saw on Fox a few minutes ago that this will go to the 9th court in CA asap to get a better ruling. The 9th is a real left court.
L

letget on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

The 9th is full of morons. Guaranteed to go the Supreme Court no?

El_Terrible on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Under siege from without AND from within. What’s a gun toting redneck gonna do?

OkieDoc on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Supreme Court, here we come.

portlandon on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

To the Supremes. Now.

Bee on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Federal judge Susan Bolton…joined the court in 2000 after being nominated by President Bill Clinton.

I swear, you don’t even have to check anymore.

What about states’ rights? And fed usurpation of those rights? Seems to me, IIRC, we had a war over this some time ago…

NTXLass on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

The ninth circuit is the most over turned court in the US.

sandee on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

issued a temporary restraining order against the most controversial portions of the Arizona immigration-enforcement law, while keeping much of it in place.

So WHAT was left?

katiejane on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Judge to voters: Go f*ck yourselves.
Judge to illegals: Line up for the settlements and handouts.

Good Lt on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

I thought permanent resident aliens already had to carry their green card with them at all times.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM

My husband is a legal resident from north of the border (I know, wrong side!) and he was told to carry his green card at all times when he got it.

So is this judge saying he doesn’t have to carry it anymore? What a doofus.

Marybeth on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Democratic appointee Judge Susan Bolton….Just following orders.

repvoter on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

Under siege from without AND from within. What’s a gun toting redneck gonna do?

OkieDoc on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

Keep faith in the system and in the people. The left is losing.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

*sigh*

I feel so helpless. Who is on our side?

jennifernaz on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

The Dear Leader has spoken. The will of the “little people” is not a concern. ‘We the people’ – hah You don’t count. Just shut the eff up and cash your welfare/unemployment/foodstamps/leap checks… Dear Leader has spoken!!!

Kuffar on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

What part of the law was left intact??

Eren on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Solution – require EVERYBODY to have proof of citizenship and require EVERYBODY to show proof of citizenship at EVERY interaction with the police. I can’t see Americans complaining about that. It is a little extra work to have your birth certificate or another form of American ID like a passport but, hey, that’s the price we pay for having a government that has allowed our laws to be ignored for decades.

allstonian on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Doughboy on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

I agree.

ladyingray on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

There are consequences from elections far beyond merely selecting a popular candidate. Clinton’s appointee Susan Bolton is the epitome of the liberal mindset. When you can’t possibly get the constitution amended to suit your political agenda, you appoint flunkies like this ditz to impose their PC will on a public that overwhelmingly opposes ILLEGAL immigration. Hey Susie … why don’t you open your home to a few illegals? What, are you some sort of hypocrite?

bannedbyhuffpo on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

a sad day indeed…

hope this backfires big time on holder and dear leader…

cmsinaz on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Michael Medved will sleep well tonight.

portlandon on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

*sigh*

I feel so helpless. Who is on our side?

jennifernaz on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

About 70% of the country. Fear not.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

This won’t stop illegals from fleeing AZ.

Jocundus on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Did I just hear Rush say that Obama will have amnesty before the election?

ladyingray on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

The Obama administration apparently has no problem with the drugs, sex slaves, terrorists, guns, & maybe even WMDs coming across the border, as long as they can get Hispanic votes in November.

itsnotaboutme on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

No papers required for non citizens…? whoopee, try this in any other country.

d1carter on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

I nominate Bolton for dog catcher. The inmates are running the asylum.

3dpuzzman on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

there comes a time in a man’s life when he must spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag and …..

from Ace

ted c on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

It is my understanding that the law only allows the police to detain someone whom they suspect may be here illegally due to the fact that they do not have valid identification or papers when being questioned by the police for a crime or violation.

ICE is then notified and they determine the legal status of the person.

Am I wrong in how I see this bill?

Jvette on July 28, 2010 at 1:38 PM

The law allowed law enforcement to request the immigration status / see immigration papers of someone they’ve detained or arrested (i.e., prove you’re a legal immigrant, which, by federal law, they have to have their immigration papers on them at all times anyhow). They’re not allowed to do that.

Enoxo on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

A temporary injunction on portions of the bill may get some people rethinking the issue

I just rethought it, and now I’m more outraged than I was before.

The government is consistently ruling against the will of the people and against basic rule of law – immigration law, contract law, FOIA law – all of it.

People will be rethinking quite a few things.

forest on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

But, but but….according to HA, the judge “scoffed” at the DoJ’s preemption arguments last week!?!?

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Hey! Where have you been?

I noticed your President is sinking like a stone in the polls, and that your party will likely lose Congress within the next few months. He’s below 50%. That means that more people disapprove of him than approve.

Care to comment? You have lots to say about things you think break well for the Obamacrats.

We’re all ears.

Good Lt on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

Celebrate today, oh savage little children of the Left.

But this is the worst thing that could have happened to you.

rrpjr on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

So, it get use to drug wars/cartel wars in the US. Coming to an illegal alien city near you. You at the City of Bell and see your future, it’s illegal alien city. Browns stealing from Browns…the Latin American way

Oil Can on July 28, 2010 at 1:43 PM

The message here?

To second class citizens of the US:
Keep Working.
Pay your taxes.
Shut up.

Your pathway to first class citizenship:
Burn your diploma.
Go on welfare.

TimBuk3 on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

My husband is a legal resident from north of the border (I know, wrong side!) and he was told to carry his green card at all times when he got it.

So is this judge saying he doesn’t have to carry it anymore? What a doofus.

Marybeth on July 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM

He has to carry it but the cops can’t ask for it?? Which means, technically, he doesn’t have to carry it, I guess.

Eren on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Is there a security perimeter / wall around the White House ? Why ?

macncheez on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

They just can’t help themselves from hittin’ that tar baby…..

cthulhu on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

allstonian on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Birther!

/;-)

VibrioCocci on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Judge blocked portion of law that makes it a crime for illegals to seek and perform work in Arizona (this is illegal in every state but Arizona now).

She blocks police from determining immigration status of someone detained or arrested (they have to wait for ICE to make determinations).

And she blocks making it a crime for not carrying your immigration papers (again, this is illegal by federal law in every state but Arizona now).

Enoxo on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

I think this judge got her law degree out of the same Crackerjack Box as Obama and Holder.

fogw on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Get ready for this, people.

YYZ on July 28, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Frankly, if this judge or any other declares this not acceptable–I.will.not.like.that. It will only reinforce my negative view of the Feds on immigration. My determination to vote for someone willing to do something about immigration will only be more determined. I don’t think I will be alone.

jeanie on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

no papers, no problems

COME ON IN

hope the ninth circus has the cajones to overturn this ruling…

cmsinaz on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

It’s not, now “legal”, in Arizona for illegals to seek work. The Federal laws still apply (Obama just won’t enforce them). She’s saying that it’s possible that the only the Federal Government has the right to establish law on immigration.

My point still stands, if the police can’t enforce federal law in this case, they can’t enforce federal law in ANY case. (kidnapping, wire fraud, computer fraud, drug trafficking, etc)

Skywise on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

If there is a silver lining, this is going to make the public even more angry. The Democrats are out there crowing now, but that’s a really stupid idea. I hope they keep it up. They really seem to be totally clueless about what the public really thinks.More likely they aren’t clueless, they just don’t care anymore what the citizens want, they just do what they want. November can’t come fast enough for me.

sandee on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Next time I’m pulled over I’m citing this injunction to the cop invoking my right to not carry any papers or ID or insurance card or heck, for that matter, that little sticker that costs butt loads of money I have to buy every year and put in the corner of my windshield.

Bikerchick on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

“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.”

and yet, the burdens in question are the mandated by the federal rules. This is a ‘kick it upstairs’ move. No matter how you slice it, this is going to SCOTUS and will be a typical 5-4.

Fighton03 on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

No longer should we question whether or not we are in a constitutional crisis. All three branches of our govt are actively working together, in spite of the wishes of the majority in this country, and are strong arming policy onto the American people that they do not want. The enemy, from within, is no longer hiding in the shadows.

Shiny_Tiara on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

To the Supremes. Now.

Bee on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

If I am not mistaken, I think this is SCALIA.

NJ Red on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

idiot CLINTON appointee…..

SDarchitect on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Count it!

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:32 PM

…only an ignorant liberal would see victory in allowing people to break the laws of our country while increasing violent crime and the enormous cost to social services.

Baxter Greene on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Count it!

crr6 on July 28, 2010 at 1:32 PM

Count the voters leaving your party.

ddrintn on July 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM

Like illegals fleeing an INS raid.

29Victor on July 28, 2010 at 1:45 PM

Michael Medved will sleep well tonight.

portlandon on July 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM

While I listen to his show most afternoons he’s far and away on the wrong side of the immigration issue.
Being that his mother was a LEGAL refugee from Nazi Germany in the late 1930′s you’d think he’d know better.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 28, 2010 at 1:46 PM

To the Supremes. Now.

Bee on July 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM

SCOTUS is in recess until October. I don’t know if an appeal to the 9th Circuit is in order, or whether Arizona should just accelerate the trial date on the substantive part of the case.
This is certainly not good news, but I’ve had many cases where I lost an initial skirmish, like an injunction, but then won on the merits. So don’t lose hope – Arizona is on the right side.

LASue on July 28, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Solution – require EVERYBODY to have proof of citizenship and require EVERYBODY to show proof of citizenship at EVERY interaction with the police. I can’t see Americans complaining about that. It is a little extra work to have your birth certificate or another form of American ID like a passport but, hey, that’s the price we pay for having a government that has allowed our laws to be ignored for decades.

allstonian on July 28, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Dear God NO.

Skywise on July 28, 2010 at 1:46 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 7