High court to hear immigration dispute
by Mark Sherman
Associated Press Writer
April 24, 2012 12:01 AM | 355 views | 0 0 comments | 4 4 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Arizona resident Jim Shee, above, will be attending the Supreme Court’s hearing on Arizona’s immigration law, SB1070, on Wednesday. Another major clash between the Obama administration and the states is coming before the Supreme Court in the fight over Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants. Like last month’s arguments over President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, the immigration case is expected to be decided at the end of June and could affect the campaign for president. Shee says he was racially profiled because of the controversial law.<br> The Associated Press
Arizona resident Jim Shee, above, will be attending the Supreme Court’s hearing on Arizona’s immigration law, SB1070, on Wednesday. Another major clash between the Obama administration and the states is coming before the Supreme Court in the fight over Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants. Like last month’s arguments over President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, the immigration case is expected to be decided at the end of June and could affect the campaign for president. Shee says he was racially profiled because of the controversial law.
The Associated Press
slideshow
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will referee another major clash between the Obama administration and the states, this one over Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigrants. The case could add fuel to the partisan split over tough state immigration laws backed by Republicans but challenged by the administration.

Like last month’s arguments over President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, the immigration case is expected to be decided at the end of June.

Wednesday’s arguments will focus on whether states can adopt their own immigration measures to deal with an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants, or whether the federal government has almost exclusive authority in the area of immigration.

Arizona was the first of a half-dozen states to enact laws intended to drive illegal immigrants elsewhere, a policy known as “attrition by enforcement.” Even where blocked by courts, these laws have already had an impact on farm fields and school classrooms as fewer immigrants showed up.

“If the federal government had been doing and would continue to do its job in securing the border here in southern Arizona, this would not be an issue. Unfortunately, they failed to do that so Arizona stepped up and said, ‘We want to be partners. Here’s a role we think we can play,’” said Sheriff Larry Dever of Cochise County, which shares an 83.5-mile border with Mexico in the state’s southeastern corner.

The administration says it has both increased border enforcement to keep people from entering illegally in the first place and picked up the pace of deportations. In its first two years, the administration deported nearly 800,000 people, far higher on a yearly basis than President George W. Bush’s administration.

The Obama administration sued to block the Arizona law soon after its enactment two years ago. Federal courts have refused to let four key provisions take effect: requiring police, while enforcing other laws, to question a person’s immigration status if officers suspect he is in the country illegally; requiring all immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers; making it a state criminal offense for an illegal immigrant to seek work or hold a job and allowing police to arrest suspected illegal immigrants without warrants.

Five states — Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina and Utah — have adopted variations on Arizona’s law. Parts of those laws also are on hold pending the outcome of the Supreme Court case.
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, spam, and links to outside websites will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides