The Supreme Court hinted at encouraging states to strengthen anti-immigration laws

The Supreme Court hinted at encouraging states to strengthen anti-immigration laws. Lawmakers and anti-illegal immigration activists across the country are gearing up as the Supreme Court appears to be leaning towards...

The Supreme Court hinted at encouraging states to strengthen anti-immigration laws. Lawmakers and anti-illegal immigration activists across the country are gearing up as the Supreme Court appears inclined to uphold parts of SB 1070, which could usher in a new wave of tough anti-illegal immigration laws. About a dozen states have expressed interest in introducing similar bills if key parts of the substate law are upheld by the Supreme Court. A decision in the federal Justice Department's case accusing Arizona of conflicts between state law and federal immigration policy is expected in June. Gehen, chairman of the "Americans for Legal Immigration" group, said, "We believe we can pass this law." Stern, chairman of the "Americans for Immigration Reform", also said he was encouraged. That's because several justices hinted during oral arguments last Wednesday that they would recommend letting the state implement the most controversial part of the law - requiring police to check the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally. Another provision allows police to arrest people suspected of being illegal immigrants without a warrant. "The justices sent a clear signal that states have a lot of room to act in this area," Stern said. "They will spend a lot of energy in the next few months examining all possibilities." If the June ruling supports Sub-Asia Bill 1070, states including Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah will all move forward with similar measures. They have all passed relevant laws but have put them on hold, waiting for the high court's decision. "If Arizona does well, we will do well," said Alabama Sen. Beason. He proposed a law that would be tougher than Arizona's. In addition to requiring police to confirm a person's citizenship when stopping a vehicle for traffic violations, it also requires government agencies to confirm legal residence status when processing car license plates, children's enrollment in school and employment. Lawmakers in many states, such as Mississippi and Pennsylvania, say they would be eager to follow the model in Arizona and Alabama if the Supreme Court gives the green light. Republican Congressman Metcalfe of Pennsylvania, chairman of the House State Government Committee, said: "If you look at the polls, whether it is business owners, employers, small business owners or administrators, the majority of Americans support laws like 1070." Metcalf has introduced a bill that contains the legal provisions of SB1070 and is waiting for a favorable Supreme Court decision before introducing it in committee. In Mississippi, a tough anti-illegal immigration bill passed Congress earlier this year but was blocked by the Senate. Its backers plan to try again next year and hope the Supreme Court decision will give them guidance. Like Mississippi, South Dakota lawmakers rejected a measure based on the Arizona law, but the bill's sponsor, Republican state Rep. Steele, said he would push through again. In Rhode Island, state Rep. Palupo said he was pleased to see the Supreme Court's clear support for allowing state capitals to impose immigration laws. In several states where the majority party does not hold a supermajority, such as Iowa, Colorado, Montana and Kentucky, lawmakers say the fate of any hard-line immigration bill will depend on November state elections.