Wall Street Journal: A federal judge today partially rejected the federal government's request to block Alabama's strict new immigration law.
At issue is a law considered the nation's toughest on illegal immigrants. It makes it a crime in Alabama for an illegal resident to apply for a job; it requires public schools to check the immigration status of students, and it authorizes state police in certain instances to verify the immigration status of people detained or arrested.
The Justice Department filed suit, claiming the law is unconstitutional on the grounds it allegedly usurps federal authority over immigration.
U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn of Alabama upheld key sections of the Alabama law concluding that they are not preempted by federal law. Blackburn let stand the provisions authorizing local police to inquire about detainees' immigration status and requiring public schools to verify students' immigration status. But the judge did enjoin other sections of the law, ruling that "there is a substantial likelihood" that the Justice Department can establish that the sections are preempted by federal law. Blackburn, for example, blocked regulations that make it a crime for illegal residents to apply for a job and that make it unlawful for people to "conceal, harbor or shield" an illegal resident.
The Law Blog has sought comment from the Department of Justice and Alabama Governor's Office.
Omar Jadwat, an attorney with the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, which has also challenged the Alabama law in court, called today's ruling a mixed bag. The judge let stand sections of the Alabama law "that are of serious concern, and the enforcement of those sections would lead to widespread civil rights violations," Jadwat said. "It is positive that she has enjoined some of the sections" of the law.
(Here's a recent WSJ article on the case)
Update: A Justice Department spokesperson said that DOJ is reviewing the ruling to determine its next steps. "We will continue to evaluate state immigration-related laws and will not hesitate to bring suit if, in fact, a state creates its own immigration policy or enforces state laws in a manner that interferes with federal immigration law," the spokesperson said.
Alabama governor Robert Bentley has released a statement calling the judge's ruling a "victory for Alabama."
"If the federal government had done its job by enforcing its own immigration laws, there would be no need for Alabama -- or other states -- to pass a law such as this. Unfortunately, they have failed to do their job," the governor said.
"The judge temporarily enjoined four parts of the law, but this fight is just beginning. I am optimistic that this law will be completely upheld, and I remain committed to seeing this law fully implemented. I will continue to fight at every turn to defend this law against any and all challenges."
At issue is a law considered the nation's toughest on illegal immigrants. It makes it a crime in Alabama for an illegal resident to apply for a job; it requires public schools to check the immigration status of students, and it authorizes state police in certain instances to verify the immigration status of people detained or arrested.
The Justice Department filed suit, claiming the law is unconstitutional on the grounds it allegedly usurps federal authority over immigration.
U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn of Alabama upheld key sections of the Alabama law concluding that they are not preempted by federal law. Blackburn let stand the provisions authorizing local police to inquire about detainees' immigration status and requiring public schools to verify students' immigration status. But the judge did enjoin other sections of the law, ruling that "there is a substantial likelihood" that the Justice Department can establish that the sections are preempted by federal law. Blackburn, for example, blocked regulations that make it a crime for illegal residents to apply for a job and that make it unlawful for people to "conceal, harbor or shield" an illegal resident.
The Law Blog has sought comment from the Department of Justice and Alabama Governor's Office.
Omar Jadwat, an attorney with the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, which has also challenged the Alabama law in court, called today's ruling a mixed bag. The judge let stand sections of the Alabama law "that are of serious concern, and the enforcement of those sections would lead to widespread civil rights violations," Jadwat said. "It is positive that she has enjoined some of the sections" of the law.
(Here's a recent WSJ article on the case)
Update: A Justice Department spokesperson said that DOJ is reviewing the ruling to determine its next steps. "We will continue to evaluate state immigration-related laws and will not hesitate to bring suit if, in fact, a state creates its own immigration policy or enforces state laws in a manner that interferes with federal immigration law," the spokesperson said.
Alabama governor Robert Bentley has released a statement calling the judge's ruling a "victory for Alabama."
"If the federal government had done its job by enforcing its own immigration laws, there would be no need for Alabama -- or other states -- to pass a law such as this. Unfortunately, they have failed to do their job," the governor said.
"The judge temporarily enjoined four parts of the law, but this fight is just beginning. I am optimistic that this law will be completely upheld, and I remain committed to seeing this law fully implemented. I will continue to fight at every turn to defend this law against any and all challenges."
No comments:
Post a Comment