Federal judge blocks key parts of Arizona immigration law

PHOENIX — A federal judge has halted the most controversial elements of Arizona’s new immigration law, which had been scheduled to take effect at midnight.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday halted implementation of the parts of the law that require
police to determine the status of people they stop and think are in the
country illegally. She also forbade the state from charging anyone for
a new crime of failing to possess immigration documents.

Bolton’s ruling found that the Obama administration
was likely to prevail at trial in proving the two provisions — and two
other ones in the sweeping law — were an unconstitutional attempt by Arizona to regulate immigration. Arizona is expected to immediately appeal the decision to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

As the clock ticked down toward the implementation
of the law known as SB 1070, tensions had been rising as both sides
braced for confrontations in the streets and waited to see how — and if
— the judge would rule before the was to take effect Thursday.

Bolton ruled on requests from civil rights lawyers
and the Obama administration to halt the law. It requires police to
determine the status of people they stop and also think are in the
country illegally. The law also makes it a state crime to lack
immigration documents.

Busloads of demonstrators were arriving from Los Angeles and were expected to join large numbers of locals protesting the measure Thursday morning. Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio — whose campaign against illegal immigrants has made him a widely
popular, if controversial, figure here — had said he would open a new
section of his outdoor tent jail that he is dubbing “Section 1070,”
where he intended to house illegal immigrants detained as a result of
the law.

Arpaio, whose downtown high-rise offices were to be
targeted by demonstrators on Thursday, released a statement before
Bolton’s ruling warning that he would not tolerate lawbreakers.
“Activists and their celebrity sympathizers who wish to target this
community and this sheriff by attempting to disrupt our jail and patrol
operations will be unsuccessful, as we will be fully prepared to meet
those challenges head-on with appropriately staffed personnel and
resources,” he said.

Several police officials expected no dramatic
changes in operations Thursday. Police already check the immigration
status of people they book into jail or people who lack a valid U.S. ID.

Still, there remained confusion about what some of the law’s provisions mean. The Phoenix and Tucson
police departments have directed their officers to hold anyone arrested
until the federal government verifies their immigration status. The
chiefs of both departments opposed the law, and supporters of the
measure have argued that the chiefs have tried to sabotage it through
an overly literal interpretation.

The law does state, however, that “any person who
is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined
before the person is released.” An attorney for Gov. Jan Brewer acknowledged in court last week that the provision is “inartfully”
written but argued it is not that broad. However, the state’s official
training guidelines say it’s unclear what the provision really means
and that each department will have to make its own interpretation.

———

(c) 2010, Los Angeles Times.

Visit the Los Angeles Times on the Internet at http://www.latimes.com/

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.