Reuters
By Lawrence Hurley
June 1, 2015
The
U.S. Supreme Court on Monday left intact an appeals court ruling from
last year that struck down an Arizona law that denied bail to illegal
immigrants charged with
certain felonies.
The
justices rejected an appeal filed by Maricopa County and its
controversial sheriff, Joe Arpaio. Three of the court's conservative
justices, Clarence Thomas, Antonin
Scalia and Samuel Alito, said they would have heard the case. Four of
the nine justices must agree to hear a case for the court to take it up.
The
court's action means the October 2014 ruling by the San Francisco-based
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the 2006 law is
unconstitutional, is the final
word in the case.
Thomas
wrote in an opinion joined by Scalia that the court's refusal to hear
the case "shows insufficient respect to the state of Arizona, its voters
and its constitution."
The
court's action "suggests to the lower courts that they have free rein
to strike down state laws on the basis of dubious constitutional
analysis," Thomas added.
Arizona
is known for putting in place tough measures cracking down on illegal
immigrants. This one was passed as a ballot measure with overwhelming
support from Arizona
voters.
The state said it was needed due in part to concerns of immigrants fleeing if allowed bail.
The
appeals court said the move was unconstitutional since it did not
address an acute problem, was not limited to a specific category of very
serious offenses and did
not consider the individual factors needed to determine if a suspect is
an unmanageable flight risk.
The law violated the U.S. Constitution's due process guarantee, the appeals court said.
The
American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the law, said in court
papers that it was the only measure of its kind in the United States.
It
said it imposed "a categorical prohibition on bail that applies to
hundreds of charged felony offenses, including nonviolent offenses that
often result in noncustodial
sentences."
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment