ImmigrationFederal court upholds ruling against Arizona immigration law
A federal appeals court ruled against the controversial Arizona immigration law stating that it was a violation of the constitution; the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a stay blocking the implementation of significant portions of the Arizona immigration law stating that immigration enforcement was a federal responsibility and the Arizona law overstepped its bounds; last month five additional immigration bills failed to pass through the Arizona legislature including the highly controversial attempt to deny children of illegal immigrants birthright citizenship; experts believe that the bills failed largely as a result of the business community’s opposition
The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals // Source: newsbythesecond.com
Yesterday, a federal appeals court ruled against the controversial Arizona immigration law stating that it was a violation of the constitution.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a stay blocking the implementation of significant portions of the Arizona immigration law.
Last year, days before the Arizona law (SB 1070) was to take effect, a federal judge imposed an injunction on major parts of the bill.
Arizona attorney general Jan Brewer requested that the injunction be lifted, but the federal court ruled that immigration enforcement was a federal responsibility and the Arizona law overstepped its bounds.
SB 1070 has drawn fierce criticism from immigration advocates who say the bill unfairly targets members of the Hispanic community and forces people to carry identity papers.
In particular, critics objected to a provision in the law that would require police to check the immigration status of any individual suspected of entering the country illegally.
Most recently five immigration bills failed to pass through the Arizona legislature including the hotly debated attempt to deny children of illegal immigrants birthright citizenship.
Experts believe that the bills failed largely as a result of the business community’s opposition.
Todd Landfried, a spokesman for the Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform, said “I think the business community here has had a long overdue impact on this. The people in the business community finally said, ‘Enough is enough,’ and told the Senate president that moving these bills forward now is damaging us.”
According to Angela Kelley, an immigration policy expert at the Center for American Progress, roughly sixty CEOs of Arizona businesses signed a letter requesting lawmakers to stop the passage of harsh immigration laws.
Kelley estimates that the backlash against SB 1070 resulted in more than $200 million in lost revenues to businesses as a result of reduced convention and conference business.
Landfried said, “At a time when businesses are moving out of the state and people are getting laid off, this is not good for the economy or the people of Arizona.”
In contrast Utah recently approved a business supported laws that would offer work permits to undocumented immigrants from Mexico.
Randy Ertll, the executive director of El Centro de Accion Social, said, “Utah is taking a more pragmatic and economic approach to address the complex and controversial immigration debate.”
Catherine Wilson, a specialist in immigration issues at Villanova University, echoed these thoughts stating that the recent Utah guest worker laws“[highlight] the degree to which businesses, law enforcement agencies, and community leaders can work together to address the comprehensive realities of immigration and ultimately influence legislative debate – at both the state and national levels.”
According to Ertll, “This will eventually benefit the Utah economy, similar to how the Bracero Program benefited the national US economy by having cheap immigrant labor to work the US agricultural fields” from 1942 to 1964.
“It was clearly the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce – and businesses more broadly – that were driving this bus,” said Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.
