>SB1070 The U.S. Supreme Court seems to accept part of SB1070

The U.S. Supreme Court seems to accept part of SB1070 (Alberta Times) The U.S. Supreme Court heard the Arizona anti-illegal immigration bill last Wednesday. According to the law...

SB1070 The U.S. Supreme Court seems to accept some of the measures (Alberta Times) The U.S. Supreme Court heard Arizona's anti-illegal immigration bill last Wednesday. Judging from the justices' reactions to the arguments and questions raised by both sides, the justices seemed to accept some of the measures. They say tough bills that would let state and local law enforcement take a more active role in identifying illegal immigrants are an effective way to protect the border. In the hearing's final oral argument, the justices appeared skeptical of the Obama administration's claim that Asia's requirement that police check the immigration status of arrestees and detainees violates Congress' authority to set immigration policy. In addition to police stops and immigration checks, the justices seemed more concerned about other parts of SB 1070, the law that led to similar crackdowns on illegal immigration in Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and Indiana. These attitudes from the justices could lead to some parts of the state law being enforced but limiting others. Chief Justice Roberts told Clement, the former Bush administration attorney general who represented the state, that the state's law that criminalizes illegal immigrants looking for work appears to "clearly exceed the sanctions allowed under federal law." Clermont acknowledged that the federal government punishes employers for using illegal immigrants, but said that does not mean that state governments cannot sanction employees themselves. Civil rights, religious and immigration groups opposed the Arizona law because they said it would lead to racial discrimination or harassment of legal citizens based on skin color and accent. Before the defense of Verrely on behalf of the government, Justice Roberts made it clear that the federal government did not use the above potential discrimination as a reason to challenge the Asian law. The Supreme Court reviewed four parts of the state's law: State and local law enforcement must verify the citizenship status of anyone stopped, detained, or arrested if they have "reasonable suspicion" that they are in the United States illegally. ★Authorizes law enforcement officials to arrest someone without a warrant if they have reason to believe the person has violated the law. ★Criminalizes illegal presence and requires non-citizens to bring documentation proving they are lawfully present. ★Make it a criminal offense for illegal residents to work or look for work.