Atlanta Journal-Constitution: A federal appeals court's decision Friday to not suspend part of Alabama's tough new immigration law is drawing mixed reactions from Georgians embroiled in a court fight over a similar measure here.
Proponents of Georgia's law said the court's ruling boosts their efforts to authorize police to investigate the immigration status of certain suspects. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta is reviewing both states' laws.
On the other side, opponents of these measures say people shouldn't read too much into the court's decision, given that it is not final. At least one outspoken critic of Georgia's statute, however, said the court's ruling is disconcerting.
At issue is a part of Alabama's law that requires police to determine the immigration status of suspects they believe are illegally in the country. The law also requires police to transfer illegal immigrants to federal authorities if those authorities so request.
Alabama officials say the law will help their state prevent illegal immigrants from taking jobs from U.S. citizens and using the state's public resources without paying their fair share in taxes.
The Obama administration is fighting the measure in court, arguing it could interfere with the nation's diplomatic relations and the federal government's authority to regulate immigration.
On Friday, the appeals court approved the U.S. Justice Department's request to temporarily put some of the law's provisions on hold pending the outcome of an appeal. Among the provisions that were halted is one that would require public school officials in Alabama to determine the immigration status of their students.
The court, however, refused to halt the provision that would require police to do immigration status checks under certain circumstances. The court did not detail how it came to this decision. But it cited several requirements petitioners must meet before the court will order injunctions, including showing substantial likelihood they will win on the merits of their appeal.
Georgia legislators inserted a similar provision this year in their immigration law -- House Bill 87 -- though it does not require police to check the immigration status of suspects. Instead, it says police are authorized to do the checks when the suspects cannot produce identification, such as a driver's license, or provide other information that could help police identify them. The same provision also authorizes police to detain and transport illegal immigrants to state and federal prisons.
In June, a U.S. district judge in Atlanta temporarily put that provision on hold. The judge made that decision amid a court challenge brought by a coalition of civil and immigrant rights groups that argue Georgia's measure is pre-empted by federal law. Georgia is appealing that decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
State Sen. Jack Murphy, R-Cumming, one of the chief supporters of Georgia's law, said the court's decision in the Alabama case helps his state's cause.
"If they pull you over or they pull me over, the first thing they are going to ask for is our driver's license," he said. "And if we don't have our driver's license, then they are going to ask you for some kind of form of identification. And then it goes from there. I don't think that is a bit unreasonable."
Jerry Gonzalez, executive director of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, said the court's ruling in the Alabama case is worrisome. Recent news reports say Hispanic immigrants have been fleeing Alabama because of its new law.
"If the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals believes that, then potentially that could go into effect here in Georgia," he said. "And the chaos that we are seeing in Alabama could happen here as well."
At the same time, attorneys opposing Georgia's and Alabama's laws cautioned the court's ruling is preliminary and not binding. The court, they said, could issue a different decision when it finally rules on the appeal.
"That's not a tea leaf I would read much into," said Brian Spears, an Atlanta-area attorney who is fighting both states' laws in court.
Proponents of Georgia's law said the court's ruling boosts their efforts to authorize police to investigate the immigration status of certain suspects. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta is reviewing both states' laws.
On the other side, opponents of these measures say people shouldn't read too much into the court's decision, given that it is not final. At least one outspoken critic of Georgia's statute, however, said the court's ruling is disconcerting.
At issue is a part of Alabama's law that requires police to determine the immigration status of suspects they believe are illegally in the country. The law also requires police to transfer illegal immigrants to federal authorities if those authorities so request.
Alabama officials say the law will help their state prevent illegal immigrants from taking jobs from U.S. citizens and using the state's public resources without paying their fair share in taxes.
The Obama administration is fighting the measure in court, arguing it could interfere with the nation's diplomatic relations and the federal government's authority to regulate immigration.
On Friday, the appeals court approved the U.S. Justice Department's request to temporarily put some of the law's provisions on hold pending the outcome of an appeal. Among the provisions that were halted is one that would require public school officials in Alabama to determine the immigration status of their students.
The court, however, refused to halt the provision that would require police to do immigration status checks under certain circumstances. The court did not detail how it came to this decision. But it cited several requirements petitioners must meet before the court will order injunctions, including showing substantial likelihood they will win on the merits of their appeal.
Georgia legislators inserted a similar provision this year in their immigration law -- House Bill 87 -- though it does not require police to check the immigration status of suspects. Instead, it says police are authorized to do the checks when the suspects cannot produce identification, such as a driver's license, or provide other information that could help police identify them. The same provision also authorizes police to detain and transport illegal immigrants to state and federal prisons.
In June, a U.S. district judge in Atlanta temporarily put that provision on hold. The judge made that decision amid a court challenge brought by a coalition of civil and immigrant rights groups that argue Georgia's measure is pre-empted by federal law. Georgia is appealing that decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
State Sen. Jack Murphy, R-Cumming, one of the chief supporters of Georgia's law, said the court's decision in the Alabama case helps his state's cause.
"If they pull you over or they pull me over, the first thing they are going to ask for is our driver's license," he said. "And if we don't have our driver's license, then they are going to ask you for some kind of form of identification. And then it goes from there. I don't think that is a bit unreasonable."
Jerry Gonzalez, executive director of the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials, said the court's ruling in the Alabama case is worrisome. Recent news reports say Hispanic immigrants have been fleeing Alabama because of its new law.
"If the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals believes that, then potentially that could go into effect here in Georgia," he said. "And the chaos that we are seeing in Alabama could happen here as well."
At the same time, attorneys opposing Georgia's and Alabama's laws cautioned the court's ruling is preliminary and not binding. The court, they said, could issue a different decision when it finally rules on the appeal.
"That's not a tea leaf I would read much into," said Brian Spears, an Atlanta-area attorney who is fighting both states' laws in court.
No comments:
Post a Comment