Politico
By Josh Gerstein
June 1, 2015
With
three justices dissenting, the Supreme Court announced Monday that it
will not review an Arizona constitutional amendment that sought to
eliminate bail in state courts
in cases involving illegal immigrants accused of serious crimes.
As is customary, the high court did not explain its decision to turn down the case,
County of Maricopa, Arizona v. Lopez Valenzuela.
However,
Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito all signaled
that they would have taken the case. Scalia also signed onto an opinion
Thomas wrote, lamenting
the court's failure to weigh into the issue.
With
a big fight between the Obama Administration and 26 states over
immigration likely headed to the Supreme Court later this year, the
lineup could signal a hardcore
group of justices ready to defer to some state actions or objections in
the realm of immigration. That said, the disputes aren't closely
parallel, so it's probably not that strong a signal.
In
the Arizona case, Thomas wrote that the Supreme Court should be quicker
to weigh in when state laws are invalidated by federal courts as the
9th Circuit did with the
immigrant bail issue.
"Our
indifference to cases such as this one will only embolden the lower
courts to reject state laws on questionable constitutional grounds,"
Thomas wrote.
The illegal immigrant bail ban was part of a ballot measure passed by Arizona voters in 2006.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment