Quantcast
Don't Miss
Home / immigration / Brewer asks U.S. Supreme Court to hear SB 1070 appeal

Brewer asks U.S. Supreme Court to hear SB 1070 appeal

Gov. Jan Brewer (AP Photo/Matt York)

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer filed an appeal Wednesday with the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a ruling that put on hold key parts of the state’s immigration enforcement law.

The appeal comes as Brewer faced a deadline for contesting a district court’s decision that, among other things, barred police from enforcing a requirement that police while enforcing other laws to question the immigration status of those they suspect are in the country illegally.

Brewer lost her first appeal in April when a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected her request to overturn the decision. The nation’s highest court has discretion on whether to hear her appeal.

Her lawyers ask the court to hear her appeal and argued that Arizona bears the brunt of America’s border problems and that the 9th Circuit’s decision conflicts with Supreme Court precedents.

“For too long the federal government has turned a blind eye as this problem has manifested itself in the form of drop houses in our neighborhoods and crime in our communities,” Brewer said in a written statement. “(The law) was Arizona’s way of saying that we won’t wait patiently for federal action any longer. If the federal government won’t enforce its immigration laws, we will.”

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The federal government, which sued Arizona in a bid to invalidate the law, has argued the law intrudes on its exclusive authority to regulate immigration, disrupts relations between the U.S. and Mexico, hinders cooperation between state and federal officials and burdens legal immigrants.

Less than a day before the law was to take effect in July 2010, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked key provisions from going into effect, including also a requirement that immigrants get and carry registration papers.

But Bolton allowed other parts, such as a ban on obstructing traffic while seeking or offering day-labor services on streets.

The law was passed in April 2010 amid years of complaints that the federal government hasn’t done enough to assist Arizona, the nation’s busiest illegal entry point, with border security. The legislation inspired protests, led to lawsuits seeking to overturn the law and a debate about whether the law would lead to racial profiling.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

2 comments

  1. Wow all I can say is Jan you ARE A HYPOCRIT!! how can you say oh prop 203 well thats illegal even though the citizens of AZ passed it so I’m going to ask our good federal government about it so they cant stop it, but wait I dont think I approve with our federal government about SB 1070 or the medicad so I’m going to be a HYPOCRIT and go against the federal government on those two issues. She is such a stupid lady that makes us and AZ look bad. Cant wait til elections and she tries to run, everyone will boo that ***.

  2. I agree Nick. She can’t have it both ways. A big difference is the federal government didn’t sue Arizona over Prop 203 as it did SB 1070. The federal government hasn’t sued any of the 16 states that have passed medical marijuana laws. Not to mention the states that have decriminalized non-medical cannabis:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Places_that_have_decriminalized_non-medical_cannabis_in_the_United_States

    People don’t like prohibition of marijuana any more than they liked prohibition of alcohol – with alcohol being much more intoxicating and damaging to society. Keeping marijuana on the black market also keeps it easily accessible to minors. It’s much easier for teens and 20-somethings to get than any other age group. And as adults, as with alcohol, we don’t need a parental government dictating what we can and can’t put into our own bodies as long as we are not harming others. This has nothing to do with “messages to young people” – they can already get it if they want it, and they fear the law & consequences the least.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top