Senate Bill 1070
-
The trial in this newest challenge to Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on the part of the ACLU began Thursday and uses “racially charged citizen complaints,” among other evidence, to show the MCSO engages in racial profiling. The trial started Thursday.
One letter from Sun City resident Gail asks the Sheriff to look into the number of Spanish-speakers working at a local McDonald’s.
Arpaio was one of the chief supporters of Senate Bill 1070, an immigration law that was largely struck down by the Supreme Court earlier this month, along with former Sen. Russell Pearce. The ACLU is using dozens of Pearce emails to prove the law was racially motivated.
The high court upheld Section 2B, the central tenet of the law which allows law enforcement officers to ascertain legal immigration status in certain situations. An injunction is still in place preventing this section from going into effect, and the ACLU is attempting to halt its implementation through a legal motion.
Section 2B could be overturned if it can be proved that the law does violate individuals’ Fourteenth Amendment rights, according to azcentral.com.
-
![Photo by Shawn Raymundo, The State Press
Andy Hernandez of El Mirage, Ariz. and Allison Culver of Glendale get into a heated argument outside the Arizona State Capitol building Monday morning over immigration issues after the Supreme Court’s split decision to block parts but uphold one key provision of Senate Bill 1070.
The culmination of a two-year argument came Monday with the Supreme Court’s split ruling on Senate Bill 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration law.
Arizona officials and residents on both sides of the issue gathered at the Capital on Monday, holding signs, conducting press conferences and, in some cases, yelling at one another.
[[MORE]]
The court upheld a key provision of the law:
Section 2(B), which requires state law enforcement officials to request immigration status documents if “reasonable suspicion” exists that a person is in the country illegally.
And struck down three others:
Section 3, which makes it illegal under state law for immigrants to violate federal laws that mandate them to apply for registration and carry a registration card.
Section 5(C), which makes it a state crime for an unauthorized immigrant to seek employment in the U.S.
Section 6, which authorizes state law enforcement officials to arrest immigrants without a warrant if the officer has probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. This would make the immigrant eligible for deportation.
According to The Arizona Republic, the upheld portion of the law is still under an injunction placed by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton in 2010. She must remove it in order for law enforcement to enforce Section 2(B).
The Supreme Court’s ruling will be used as a basis for deciding other lawsuits involving SB 1070.
Read the full article, including reactions from Arizona elected officials, on StatePress.com](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m66xa4A68p1rvm6bpo1_500.jpg)
Photo by Shawn Raymundo, The State Press
Andy Hernandez of El Mirage, Ariz. and Allison Culver of Glendale get into a heated argument outside the Arizona State Capitol building Monday morning over immigration issues after the Supreme Court’s split decision to block parts but uphold one key provision of Senate Bill 1070.
The culmination of a two-year argument came Monday with the Supreme Court’s split ruling on Senate Bill 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration law.
Arizona officials and residents on both sides of the issue gathered at the Capital on Monday, holding signs, conducting press conferences and, in some cases, yelling at one another.
-
Photo by Shawn Raymundo, The State Press
The Supreme Court is expected to decide on a two-year-old Arizona immigration law this week, an issue that brought more than 1,000 immigration activists and Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio supporters to “Tent City” on Saturday evening.
The event was staged to protest Arpaio over immigration sweeps, allegations of inmate mistreatment at Tent City, the outdoor jail, and his support of Senate Bill 1070, a law passed by the legislature in 2010 allowing state law enforcement officials to enforce federal immigration policies.
SB 1070 challengers claim federal immigration policies supersede any state laws, and that the law encourages racial profiling by allowing officers to request proof of citizenship if they suspect someone is in the country illegally.
The court’s decision will set a precedent for determining how far states can go in enforcing federal immigration laws. The decision could also impact laws modeled after SB 1070 that were passed in Alabama, Georgia, Utah and South Carolina.
Find the full story and slideshow here.
ACLU: Arizona laws, MCSO practices racially motivated
About The 12
The 12 is a group Tumblr of The Washington Post and student journalists in 12 battleground states documenting the 2012 presidential election and capturing perspectives of young voters.
Submit your ideas
Do you have interesting news, notes, quotes, campaign materials or multimedia that we should feature? Do you have something to report about young voters?
Contributors to The 12
amzam
ngjennings
ryankellett
slcarothers
washingtonpostpolitics
alison-noon
cpozernick
haleykmetz
jakepdeschuiteneer
lagore2012
mechellehankerson
news-junkie
rileyjsnyder
sarahglen
tessafox
thatgoeshere
thejadedouso
themizzou12
tylerborchers
ymgonzal
zachtilly
