SharePosted on 05/27/2010 8:51:17 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
A team of Justice Department attorneys has written a recommendation challenging the Arizona immigration law.
The draft recommendation, part of an ongoing Justice Department review, concludes the Arizona legislature exceeded its authority in crafting a law that could impede federal responsibility for enforcing immigration laws.
Some department lawyers are also concerned that the law could lead to abuses based on race.
The review, however, is not yet complete and there are some within the Justice Department who challenge the recommendation's legal analysis. Sources tell ABC News that the ongoing review may take weeks more and that no formal recommendation has been sent to the White House.
The White House will have to give its stamp of approval for the Justice Department to challenge the law because this is a civil case.
If the administration eventually does sponsor a constitutional challenge to the Arizona law, it downgrades the president's move to send 1,200 National Guardsmen to the Arizona border from an impressive bit of political triangulation to a pathetic one.
How exactly is the Federal Government enforcing the law?
They aren’t
Once AZ law enforcement determines (by whatever means) that an individual is in this country illegally, that individual is turned over to Federal Immigration - read the law. State LEO’s don’t have the authority to deport, unfortunately.
What happens then? The individual has a lovely time in Federal Custody, enjoying free food, housing, medical care etc., on my dime, while he waits out his endless appeals filed by the various bleeding heart liberal ACLU type organizations. Maybe he’ll be deported, eventually.
I never liked this legislation because I don’t think that, in the long run, it does a damn thing to resolve the problem of illegal aliens.
I say, go after the people that employ them.
And where are these people going to be incarcerated ? I hope not in Arizona...
They will be incarcerated at a Federal facility - where ever that may be. Transportation provided, free of charge.
In a Liberal, socialized society, it pays better to be a criminal or dead beat...
Ping!
“crafting a law that could IMPEDE federal”....What are they meaning “impede”. Something has to be happening, something has to be moving.....How can you impede a gubmint that is motionless??
Not Guilty, Judge..
“We’ll see how many of those sitting justices really uphold the law of the land.”
You expect a bunch of lawyers to uphold the law?
Arizona: Doing a job the US government won’t do.
Can the SCOTUS force the DOJ to pay back the State of Arizona for attorney fees taken only from the DOJ budget?
Can 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) "Any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law" be applied to a local police officer who conducts a traffic stop and finds a driver of a car (who may be an illegal) who has other people in the car as passengers (who are illegal) under the "transports" clause?(a) Criminal penalties
(1)
(A) Any person who—
(i) knowing that a person is an alien, brings to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien;
(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(iv) encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law; or
(v)
(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or
(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,
shall be punished as provided in subparagraph (B).
In other words, could Arizona police officers (under the definition of "any person who" be held in violation of this law by not detaining someone they suspect to be in violation of the above clause?
(c) Authority to arrest
No officer or person shall have authority to make any arrests for a violation of any provision of this section except officers and employees of the Service designated by the Attorney General, either individually or as a member of a class, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws.
Does "all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal laws" refer to state and local police officers?
(3) Upon the request of the governor or chief executive officer of any State, the Service shall provide assistance to State courts in the identification of aliens unlawfully present in the United States pending criminal prosecution.
The governor has the power to request the federal government to assist in the determination of immigration status of detained suspects.
So, Federal law allows for Arizona police to detain suspected illegal aliens pending ICE review.
The Governor can request federal support in determining the status of detainees.
-PJ
If Arizona established sanctuary cities, then there would definitely be an attempt to impede the Federal Government. But Arizona crafted a law with procedures which are Constitutional, so as to lawfully supplement the effort by the Federal Government to enforce immigration laws. At least that was the intent. Then John Morton from ICE and said that the Government wouldn’t necessarily process people referred to ICE from Arizona. Ok now, just who in hell is impeding who?
That would look good in court, but where would it leave Arizona's state enforcement effort?
Ah, but they’ve found a way around that. It says “COULD” impede... meaning that if the feds decide to actually get off their backsides and do something, the locals might get in their way.
Wow, just think of all the laws and lawsuits the government could come up with, based on what “could” happen.
Pretty scary, actually.
Wasn’t there something yesterday on FR to the effect that CA has a very similar law already on the books (long forgotten and/or ignored)? Is the DoJ going to challenge the CA law also?
How can the Feds be impeded when they’re not doing anything?
See post number 7.
Yes...all other officers whose duty is to enforce the laws...means any sworn law enforcement officer...note it does not specify federal, state, or local.
The DOJ is going to get embarrassed in court going after SB 1070. Holder will look like a bigger racist idiot
Re 38: Thanks for your interpretation.
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.