Judge blocks key parts of Arizona immigration law

PHOENIX Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:54pm EDT

Demonstrators hold a banner as they protest against Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070 immigration law outside the U.S. District Court in Phoenix July 22, 2010. REUTERS/Joshua Lott

Demonstrators hold a banner as they protest against Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070 immigration law outside the U.S. District Court in Phoenix July 22, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Joshua Lott

Related Topics

U.S. Secret Service provide security for President Barack Obama in Pensacola, Florida, June 15, 2010. REUTERS/Jim Young

Protecting the President

The Secret Service detail surrounding President Obama.  Slideshow 

PHOENIX (Reuters) - A judge on Wednesday blocked key parts of Arizona's tough new immigration law, granting the Obama administration's request for an injunction on grounds that immigration matters are the federal government's responsibility.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton agreed to an injunction on provisions including one that required a police officer to determine the immigration status of a person detained or arrested if the officer believes the person is not in the country legally.

The Republican-controlled Arizona Legislature passed the law in April to try to stem the flow of illegal immigrants over the state's border with Mexico and cut down on drug trafficking and crime -- setting it on a collision course with the federal government.

(Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky in Washington and Tim Gaynor in Phoenix, Editing by Sandra Maler)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
Lady50 wrote:
Well, now let’s remember all this in November, VOTE THESE NUT JOBS OUT!!!

Jul 28, 2010 1:57pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GSH10 wrote:
Too bad the judge cannot order the federal government to be accountable for their responsibility, however, that may be grounds for a damages lawsuit by Arizona.

Jul 28, 2010 2:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JDP0005cui wrote:
Is this really surprising? Clinton’s judicial appointees were all liberal activists. Between his appointees and Obama’s the courts are largely a joke.

Let’s just look at one aspect to show what a clown this lady is. Federal statute authorizes states to request information from the federal government on the legal status of individuals. Congress intentionally passed a law that forces the executive branch to respond to state reuests for information. This ridiculous judge claims that a state law that will result in requesting such information from the executive branch is preempted by federal law. How is it preempted by federal law when federal law authorizes it? If the Obama administration doesn’t like the fact states can request such then Obama has to have Congress change federal law. Using the courts to skirt a federal law is an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers.

Jul 28, 2010 3:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.