Department of Justice vs. Arizona
by Restore Fairness, Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 05:54:19 PM EDT
From the Restore Fairness blog.
In the short time since Arizona passed SB 1070 into law, it has become one of the strongest and most controversial symbols of our nation’s debate on immigration. SB 1070 requires the police to stop anyone that has a “reasonable suspicion” of being undocumented but once enacted, it is believed that may well lead to unconstitutional racial profiling and a breakdown of trust between police and the communities they protect. But SB 1070 is also emblematic of the frustration that many have with our broken immigration system, a sign that states have decided to take immigration into their own hands as Congress remains in a deadlock over immigration reform. The latest catalyst for this debate - a lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice brought against the state of Arizona and SB1070 on July 6th, 2010.
Analysis over the implications of the lawsuit are rife in the media. Many are looking at the lawsuit and its potential for setting a new precedent with regards to the tussle between the federal government and state laws around immigration. Previous precedent shows a tendency for federal courts to side with the federal government on cases when states and cities pass laws that conflict with federal immigration law. An article in the Wall Street Journal traces this precedent back to laws in the 1880s aimed at limiting Chinese immigration. While the dispute could go either way, some analysts hold that that the federal court could only block sections of the law, while allowing some others to be enforced.
By bringing a lawsuit against the state of Arizona, the Obama administration (via the Justice Department) has taken a strong stand against the law. But an article in the Washington Post discusses further implications of this stand. The article quotes the Democratic strategist who spoke about the implications of the lawsuit for the Democrat party -
There is probably some short term pain politically given how popular the law is…But considering the demographic changes the country is undergoing, long term, there is a lot of upside in advocating for Latinos and comprehensive immigration reform.
While the Obama administration is advocating for comprehensive immigration reform, the Democrat party has continued to play safe so as not to alienate the large electoral base that supports the Arizona law and other enforcement heavy approaches to immigration. On the other hand, many Republicans, who support the law and an enforcement heavy approach, continue to emphasize a secure border-then reform approach, a rhetoric that leads to little progress on the issue. Republicans such as Senator John McCain, who previously argued for comprehensive reform, have abandoned their support of an immigration overhaul in the face of resentment and anger from within the party as well as from anti-immigrant groups such as the Tea Party Movement.
In the midst of all these actions are ordinary people suffering disruptions to their everyday lives on account of an immigration system that remains unjust and broken.
Photo courtesy of americasvoiceonline.org
Learn. Share. Act. Go to restorefairness.org
Tags: 287G, Fair Day in Court, Racial Profiling, Arizona, Attorney General Eric Holder, bi-partisan, Breakthrough, Democrats, Department of Justice, Eric Holder, federal court, Gov. Jan Brewer, lawsuit, Lawsuit against SB1070, President Obama, Republicans, Restore Fairness, SB1070, Senator John McCain, Supreme Court, Tea Party Movement, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, blog, deportation, detention, due process, enforcement, family, human rights, immigration, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Immigration Reform (all tags)