Federal Judge Blocks Portions of Arizona Illegal Immigration Law

**jason_jinx** · 07-28-10, 03:04 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010...n-law-dispute/

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to President Obama and other opponents of the crackdown and a setback for Gov. Jan Brewer other supporters. (AP)

Yep.

**Highstakes72** · 07-28-10, 03:07 PM

Happens alot when the potential scope of the case exceeds the normal purview of the court...i.e. the court makes a preliminary ruling and refers to a higher circuit.

**Alundil** · 07-28-10, 03:21 PM

Except that the argument is not that the portions blocked were illegal, wrong, or unconstitutional. They were blocked under "field preemption." And basically kicked up the chain.

This is not the end of Round #1 - that was the bell just being wrung.

**jason_jinx** · 07-28-10, 03:43 PM

Actually this would be the end of round one.

The law was stopped cold from truly going into effect. I would call that a first round knockdown.

The law was piss poor and barely scratched the surface of the problem. It was also passed by lame GOP marketing scare tactics. By that I mean the whole illegals are all dangerous argument.

Immigration reform on a federal level is in the works. No reason to let AZ jump the gun with crap.

Sent from my iPhone4 using Tapatalk

**deathgodusmc** · 07-28-10, 06:07 PM

"the partial injunction on SB 1070 means Arizona, for the time being, will not be able to require police officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest.

Bolton said she was putting those sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.

"The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money," the ruling said. "Even though Arizona's interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws."

Jason you kill me. How is that the end of round one? Putting them on hold is standard practice. Its not even close to over. All she did was set it up for a supreme court hearing. She did her job at her level and reffered it to where it needs to be.

**jason_jinx** · 07-28-10, 06:32 PM

I know it must be a heartbreaker for you and you are trying sooooo hard to spin it your way but no......

**SpecOpsScott** · 07-28-10, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by jason_jinx

Actually this would be the end of round one.

I would call it more of a speed bump.

**deathgodusmc** · 07-28-10, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by jason_jinx

I know it must be a heartbreaker for you and you are trying sooooo hard to spin it your way but no......

Spin what? Those are the statements from the article in quotes which clearly say Bolten put those sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Just in case you didnt bother to read the whole thing Bolten is the judge that made the decision to put them on hold.

**jason_jinx** · 07-28-10, 07:30 PM

The law is still banned from being enforced.

That is what matters.

It really was a weak pipe dream law that had no relevant effect in the real world.

Sent from my iPhone4 using Tapatalk

**Kraker Jak** · 07-28-10, 07:32 PM

"The federal government has a right and a responsibility to enforce existing laws, but when they fail to meet that responsibility, we should not stand in the way of the states that take action to respond to the very real threat of border violence, drug cartels and human smuggling," he said in a written statement. "There's nowhere in the Constitution that says a state is limited to what it absolutely won't do and can be stopped for what it might do and to exercise a judgment against a state that has passed a law that is consistent with existing federal law is beyond absurd."

yep