5. News from the Courts:
Arizona immigration law: Judge denies bid to halt lawsuit
The Arizona Republic reports U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton denied motions by Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, Maricopa County Sherriff Joe Arpaio, and Pinal County Sherriff Paul Babeu to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Senate Bill 1017. The plaintiffs, led by the Phoenix advocacy group Friendly House and the ACLU, argued that SB 1017 infringed on the rights guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment, which guards against unreasonable search and seizure, and the Fourteenth Amendment, which prohibits racial discrimination.
Bolton, however, rejected the ACLU’s arguments that the language of the law was unconstitutionally vague and that forbidding illegally present immigrants from soliciting work violated the First Amendment. BorderSherriffs.com issued a press release claiming victory in this partial dismissal. Sherriff Babeu stated that he is ‘pleased the Court has acknowledged the ACLU has not proven how a law that has yet to be enforced would actually cause harm.’
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/2010/10/12/20101012arizona-immigration-law-lawsuit-challenge-denied.html
http://www.bordersheriffs.com/newsroom/press-release-72.html
* * * * * *
C-SPAN will televise SB 1070 appeal live
The Associated Press reports that C-SPAN will televise the November 1st hearing in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer will appeal a ruling that struck down parts of her state’s controversial immigration law. United Press International reports that Arizona cities such as Tucson and Tolleson, fearing that the responsibility of immigration enforcement would take away from enforcing against other crimes, have joined the Justice Department’s suit. Under a provision included in SB 1070, a city can be sued for not following the law
http://www.necn.com/10/13/10/C-SPAN-gets-OK-to-televise-immigration-h/landing_politics.html?&blockID=3&apID=9b3b25bc1bbf454c875b6bed7a399d09
* * * * * *
U.S. citizen sues over wrongful deportation
The Associated Press reports that Mark Lyttle, an English speaking, mentally disabled U.S. citizen, is seeking damages from the federal government in relation to his deportation to Mexico. The lawsuit was filed in Atlanta, GA by the ACLU and a parallel lawsuit is being filed in North Carolina against immigration and prison officials.
In 2008, Lyttle was serving prison time in North Carolina for the misdemeanor offense of inappropriately touching a female orderly at a psychiatric hospital. He drew the attention of prison officials when he gave Mexico as his place of birth. He was eventually deported and spent four months wandering Central America, where he was imprisoned in Mexico, Honduras, and Nicaragua for failing to prove his identity. Although he eventually signed papers allowing his deportation, his lawyers argue that he was too mentally disabled to understand what he was signing and thus he was manipulated by immigration officials.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jZqiEEgsHMJjGyQuQTx3l1iNTg3wD9IR5IPG0?docId=D9IR5IPG0
* * * * * *
Supreme Court takes Arizona E-Verify legislation
The Clarion-Ledger (Jackson, MS) reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up an appeal that challenges the Legal Arizona Workers Act. The 2007 piece of legislation, which requires companies to check the legal status of employees through the online federal database E-Verify, was already upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in 2008. The case will be heard on December 8th and could set a precedent for 14 other states with similar mandates. Mississippi, for example, passed the Employment Protection Act in 2008, requiring all companies with more than 20 workers to use E-Verify.
Carter Phillips, attorney for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is leading the challenge against Arizona’s E-Verify law, argues that Congress clearly intended for the E-Verify program to be voluntary. Mississippi Senator Chris McDaniel, on the other hand, contends that federal law has ‘encouraged federal and state collaboration regarding enforcement of immigration law’ and thus the legislation should be upheld.
http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20101011/NEWS/10110311/Justices-take-E-Verify-case
* * * * * *
