Posted on 05/23/2006 8:17:41 PM PDT by SandRat
A judge is considering a challenge to an Arizona law creating the state crime of immigrant smuggling, an offense that has drawn about 100 prosecutions and is criticized because it has been used mostly on the customers of smugglers.
Lawyers for nearly all of the first 48 immigrants charged under the 9-month-old law argued the Legislature never intended it to be used on their clients for paying someone to bring them into Arizona, the nation's busiest illegal entry point.
They also called the law an unconstitutional attempt by the state to regulate immigration, a legal area they contend is under the exclusive control of the federal government.
Prosecutors said the Legislature didn't prohibit the customers of smugglers from being prosecuted under the new law and argued that it was on sound constitutional ground.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Thomas O'Toole heard arguments Tuesday morning and said he'd issue a ruling at a later date.
While Congress has prevented states from enacting laws in some facets of immigration, such as penalties for hiring illegal immigrants, federal lawmakers have let states pass laws in other areas, such as human smuggling, prosecutors said.
The Legislature passed the law amid growing frustration over the state's porous 375-mile border with Mexico and the huge health care and education costs for illegal immigrants and their families. The Pew Hispanic Research Center estimates that 500,000 of the state's population of about 6 million are illegal immigrants.
Last year, Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas wrote a legal opinion saying illegal immigrants suspected of using smugglers can be charged as conspirators to the crime. The lawmaker who proposed the law has said it was intended to apply only to smugglers.
In the case being argued before the judge Tuesday, 48 illegal immigrants were charged as conspirators.
While Thomas has defended his interpretation as necessary for holding the customers of smugglers accountable, critics said his approach is overreaching, would be expensive if applied on a wide scale and was expected to be overturned.
The law's use has been limited mostly to Maricopa County, the state's most populous county and a hub for smugglers transporting illegal workers across the country.
Authorities elsewhere in the state have found it hard to hold illegal immigrants who are witnesses to the crime when they haven't been accused of working as smugglers or charged with state crimes.
Another problem is that some local authorities don't have enough money or employees to enforce the law, which provided no extra funding.
The law inspired Thomas, who campaigned on a platform of getting tough on illegal immigration, and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio to create special units devoted to fighting migrant smuggling. The sheriff has assigned 250 members of his volunteer posse to find and arrest illegal immigrants.
BORDER Ping
It wont be overturned; sherriff joe has.15cents a day housing costs. Break the law see what it's like living in a tent city.
I wonder how people get jobs a reporter and know nothing. I thought there was something about state's rights, and the power of the people, not federal lawmakers are GOD.
"Exclusively under control of Fed/Guv/" And Fed/Guv has told the USA, "You can go straightn
to hell!!!" "We ain't gonna control the border and illegal and ENEMY infiltration of te USA!" Ya got it? Peons!!!
I would argue the exact opposite; Not allowing a state to enforce this law would infringe on a state's police power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.