Arizona anti-immigrant law goes down, sort of

[lawgator1]

Supreme Court just ruled. Says that state can't arrest people without warrants for offenses the officer thinks might result in removal. Also can't require aliens to register, and can't make it a crime to seek work.

Held, however, that the details of the whole stop and detain people based on possible immigration status too vague to rule upon, and so sent that back.

[Lexvol]

Will be interesting to get further details. The section "sent back" seemed to be the crux of the challenge.

[utvolpj]

so the states can't enforce and the feds won't enforce? Sounds like they should just remove it from the books altogether

[Lexvol]

Originally Posted by utvolpj

so the states can't enforce and the feds won't enforce? Sounds like they should just remove it from the books altogether

So they weren't ruled unconstitutional? Just preemption?

[PuntBamaPunt]

citizens u making a guest appearance today.

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by utvolpj

so the states can't enforce and the feds won't enforce? Sounds like they should just remove it from the books altogether

It is an interesting series of events recently. Court says it's a Fed issue only, Fed says they won't enforce.

SB1070 was an over reach but there's got to be some solution here.

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by Lexvol

So they weren't ruled unconstitutional? Just preemption?

that's my understanding - it's a Fed issue.

[BigPapaVol]

Originally Posted by volinbham

that's my understanding - it's a Fed issue.

yes, meaning it's no longer an issue at all, which is the reason the state of AZ started all of this.

[Velo Vol]

It's comical watching TV news talking people trying to "analyze" a just-released ruling when they have no idea what it says.

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by Lexvol

So they weren't ruled unconstitutional? Just preemption?

The argument from the feds wasn't that they were unconstitutional. The argument was preemption. On three of the four provisions, the Supreme Court, agreed with the feds that they were preempted by federal law. On the fourth -- the stop and investigate provision -- they basically kicked the can a little further down the road.

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by Velo Vol

It's comical watching TV news talking people trying to "analyze" a just-released ruling when they have no idea what it says.

Yep - had it on Fox and the reporter on the scene (Shannon Bream who is pretty sharp and hot of course) had it right but the dumb ass Bill Hemmer couldn't get it right. The look of disgust on her face was priceless.

[golfballs]

How did the voting go?

[lawgator1]

Originally Posted by golfballs

How did the voting go?

Party line.

[GAVol]

Originally Posted by volinbham

Yep - had it on Fox and the reporter on the scene (Shannon Bream who is pretty sharp and hot of course) had it right but the dumb ass Bill Hemmer couldn't get it right. The look of disgust on her face was priceless.

I was listening to that on XM and wondered if I was missing something or if Hemmer was clueless. Dude sounded like a moron trying to get her to clarify what seemed pretty simple.

[GAVol]

Originally Posted by golfballs

How did the voting go?

Same as many controversial decisions go . . . 5-4 with Kennedy as the swing vote.