Federal appeals court appears to support some parts of Arizona's immigration law and reject others

A federal appeals court that is reviewing Arizona's tough new immigration law appeared inclined Monday to permit the state to require police to investigate the immigration status of people they have legally stopped but also seemed ready to reject more punitive provisions giving the state enforcement powers.

A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, meeting in San Francisco, appeared likely to rule that Arizona may require police in certain situations to investigate a person’s immigration status if there is reasonable cause to suspect that person had committed a crime.

But the panel also seemed to agree with a lower court ruling that other provisions of Arizona’s law were "preempted" by the federal government's sole authority to regulate immigration.

The court appeared likely to reject provisions that would make it a state crime for a person to not carry immigration papers and that allows for criminal punishment of illegal immigrants who seek work in Arizona.

“This is going to be a mixed verdict,” predicted UC Hastings Law Professor David I. Levine, noting that the law may ultimately be rendered meaningless.

About 200 demonstrators turned up outside the court, with about half opposing the Arizona law and the others backing the legislation. Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer also attended the proceedings.

The 9th Circuit judges chosen randomly to hear Arizona's appeal are John Noonan, an appointee of Ronald Reagan and a moderate; Richard Paez, a Bill Clinton appointee and the son of Mexican immigrants; and Carlos Bea, an appointee of George W. Bush who was born in Spain and once was ordered deported from the United States. Bea appealed and won.

A decision by the 9th Circuit panel could be appealed to a larger circuit panel and then to U.S. Supreme Court. The three-member panel’s ruling could come within weeks or months.

-- Maura Dolan in San Francisco

Photo: Jeff Chiu / Associated Press

Comments

[U Sam]

Can local police investigate and/or arrest a citizen accused of committing a federal crime? Surely all those who oppose police questioning someone whom they suspect might not be in the country legally would have no problem with local cops making an arrest if someone was accused of a 'hate crime' and having the feds prosecute.

My concern is as another commenter implied, if the politicians continue to fail the citizens or ram another amnesty through, more extreme individuals might choose to take matters into their own hands resulting in many ugly consequences for all involved. Certainly don't condone or wish it but can see how someone could justify radical actions in their minds given the governments track record and blatant disregard for the will of the people on this issue for decades.

Also, what is the exact process for randomly choosing judges to hear a certain case? Names in a hat? Does a computer make the selection? Or is it a person/panel of people dictating case assignments? A few more details on that aspect of the case would be nice.

[Andrew]

Federal employees make good money which is donated (taxed) involuntarily by you hard workers thanks to Obama. Each State should be allowed to run their own business, unlike Californian's (40 yo's and up) who are content to let big brother babysit them.

[JK1087]

@Lori I hate to burst your bubble but "American Indians" are immigrants too. I believe depending on what author you believe that they came from Asia or the Polynesian Islands. If humans arose from Africa which seems right now to be the most agreed upon history, we should be citizens of that country and ALL other countries contain immigrants. So exactly how far back do you want to go? Right now it is determined by whatever group controls that piece of land as a sovereign country.

[Pasquino Marforio]

"A decision by the 9th Circuit panel could be appealed to a larger circuit panel and then to U.S. Supreme Court. The three-member panel’s ruling could come within weeks or months."

Oh, we can bet on it, actually. The Arizona law, in it's entirety should be upheld.

[c]

In response to John K
Your reasoning does not make sense. If only straight judges can hear gay cases, if only native born can hear an immigration case then where do you stop? Black cops only arrest black people? only hispanic judges can hear hispanic cases because of fear of bias?
Justice should be blind and should not discriminate even if sometimes you dont like the outcome.

[sebek]

Hello Mr Jon K, which part of "randomly chosen" justices dont you get. In any case, there are 2 republican-appointed judges in there, unless you mean to say that Regan is now too far in the left for the current crop of tea-party republicans!! Arizona's law is a legal stunt and a joke. They could have done something better, but instead chose to make a political theater. The quicker this law is discarded, better it is for all those who are working to really secure our border, and bring in immigration reform.

[M.A. Downen]

Souds to me like a lot of biased racism. "They look like
Hispanics" ??. Do you relize that when the U.S. took cotrol of the South Western U.S., it was largely hispanic. and so thus became U.S. citizens. So to say that someone who looks like a hispanic should be required to show proof of citizenship is ludicrous.

[stanley Kerns]

If the make up of the judicial panel is a coincidence then we all better equip ourselves with rear view mirrors to fend off flying pigs.

[Tom]

The Mexican dude in the picture spelled Veto "Vetoe" ... Probably someone who is illegally here ... can't even spell a simple word in english ... yet finds it necessary to protest the fact that he can't be here .... point proven.

[ThoureaulyWalden]

I just find it interesting that Americans are considered Nazis for enforcing our laws (in reference to the photo). Why the double standard? Why can't America enforce our immigration laws and other countries are allowed to? Is it because ours are so generous (and worldwide, they truly are) that people expect there to be no law regarding it at all?

[curiousprl]

Hello!!!! Richard Paez and Carlos Bea ruling this one....I SMELL LATIN BIAS AND NOT US JUSTICE.

[grantrl78]

i love how its "controversial" to require lawbreakers to follow the law. this reminds me of how the us courts forbid people to check your immigration status at a polling place. what a joke. are we really supposed to let mexicans vote in our elections? our government consists of a bunch of wimps and or crooks. I am a liberal who is so angry that I might join the teaparty if that is what it takes to get our government to act.

[riposter]

You can watch the hearing here:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296345-1

United States v. State of Arizona

Again listen to judge ask why Congress can't address the Arizona Law directly if it objects at just past 40 minutes into the hearing. If you care about illegal immigration, you need to demand an open process the will identify the politicians who are encouraging it and have lied consistently to the citizens of this country about being against illegal immigration. I want Congress to further authorize states to help in immigration enforcements, which would be a massive and quick force multiplier, and I want Congress to mandate and verify that the administration begin enforcing the laws effectively. I want it to mandate the use of E-verify instead of Obama's legal alignment with open-border groups to fight states ability to require E-verify's use, strengthen that system and require that employers cease employing those who don't resolve their work identities that don't match federal records. Obama killed a pending rule that would have required the later. It's simply outrageous that while millions of legal workers remain unemployed, the administration turns a blind eye to the on-the-books employment of millions of illegal immigrants.

[Faptimus Prime]

Way to turn America into a chaotic country. You have illegal immigrants taking jobs from Americans, Gay's allowed to openly and freely make passes at other soldiers....I wonder what else is next. This country is going to hell in a hand basket.

[JK1087]

@UCLA Law Girl I wasn't implying anything. I was making an observation as I stated. I did Goggle the 9th as you suggested and found they also meet in Pasadena, Seattle and Portland. It does appear that they had options for the venue. I did not read through the whole website so I could be wrong about what areas have what jurisdiction. Again just an observation. Not casting any stones.

[penguin]

Why wouldn't the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals meet in San Francisco for this case?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit

Cases from Arizona are always heard in the San Fran court.

[penguin]

Also, Jon K, I don't believe you can pick your judge when you file an appeal. Judges are usually assigned randomly.

"How are judges assigned to cases?

Judge assignment methods vary. The basic considerations in making assignments are to assure equitable distribution of caseloads and avoid judge shopping. By statute, the chief judge of each district court has the responsibility to enforce the court's rules and orders on case assignments. Each court has a written plan or system for assigning cases. The majority of courts use some variation of a random drawing. One simple method is to rotate the names of available judges. At times judges having special expertise can be assigned cases by type, such as complex criminal cases, asbestos-related cases, or prisoner cases. The benefit of this system is that it takes advantage of the expertise developed by judges in certain areas. Sometimes cases may be assigned based on geographical considerations. For example, in a large geographical area it may be best to assign a case to a judge located at the site where the case was filed. Courts also have a system to check if there is any conflict that would make it improper for a judge to preside over a particular case. "

http://www.uscourts.gov/Common/FAQS.aspx

[jim]

Wow, the law may be rendered meaningless by the communists on the 9th Circuit. Whodda thunk?

[Sickened]

THANK YOU Jeff Chiu, Los Angeles Times and all the media out there who always provides pictures and interviews with the biggest idiots out there that sound like morons and cannot spell their own name. Thank you for making all Hispanics look like idiots, thank you.

[commonman13]

The liberals want to protect illegal immigrants, their murders, drug crimes and want to punish white collar criminars very severely. The conservatives are willing to overlook white collar criminals and punish the small time criminals,illegal immigrants,drug crimes,murders,etc... There is no middle of the ground in these 2 groups. As a moderate, I think both white collar and blue collar criminals deserve very serious punishment as they have in china. death penalty to both of them.

[Youth of America]

The problem comes when the Laws of Mexico are similar to the Laws that those worried about illegal immigration at a high 7 million people immigrating a year. The reality is you can't go to Mexico and gain status as a Mexican or even gain welfare care like you can in the US. However, Mexico wants their citizens to be able to migrate freely for monetary concerns. Hundres of Billions of dollars flow across that boarder each year un taxed made by illegal immigrants and drug dealers. This is mainly due to Mexico's ridiculous wage payment for their security officers along with their inability to allow citizens to protect themselves. You have security officers who do not even make enough money to survive on trying to combat drug dealers who can pay them enough to send their kids to good schools. Then this basic problem of freedom of self security and proper set up of official security then creates a social hazard as drug dealers gain political and military controll. This then makes Mexican's not want to live in Mexico due to the oppressive regimes of drug dealers owning business and treating their workers like slaves. Along these lines, the US's welfare system is already over worked. Every new million illegal immigrants we find creats a rash string of gangs inside of America. Which then do the bidding for the cartels in Mexico. This has been proven from historical times on up that immigration creates gangs as they can't find legal work so they have to find money any way they can. This is also seen as in high illegal immigrant cities you find the highest rates of crime. It is more or less like saying it is ok Mexico because of your horrible social structure and inability to deal with major cartels that we allow then there soldiers to come to America and then work jobs that US citizens need as we have over a 10% unemployment rate. Then it is like saying it is ok the US can solve the worlds problems. No, no we can't our account balances alone show that the US has huge economic issues that are not being dealt with.
However, the statute as contrewed did leave way for racial profiling. Which is wrong. There is a way to do it. Simply the rule of law in most states is you have to have a state id. Which means anyone who is stopped for lest say driving without insurance, standing on corners, selling drugs, or has to take their kids to school or hospital should have to have an id. If they do not then they should be placed into a system of illegal immigrants which then should be dealt with. However, our welfare system is so taken out by our inability to deal with our account balances that create inflation and then hugely impact savings. That we can't even create the proper program to deal with illegal immigrants. Along with that the new biometric and sound plus feel gates that were being placed up had to be stopped because our account balances could not afford to create a proper watch area against terroist, gangsters and those feeling the terroist and gangsters.
The main thing is. It is like I tell the illegal immigrants I see. You know my grandady and his dad and his dad all fought for right sin America against corrupt rich folks, gangs and the like. Why do your people run from it. Then again my folks have the right of self protection. Which the Mexican folks do not hvae which means the only way to create a deterenace is to have high paid security officers above the redline of corruptability with proper watchings by internal departments of their expenditures and then a high resolve of the people to want to stay and figure it out.
It is hard. however, I have done studies on european immigrants, african immigrants and then of course Latin immigrants. They all flee for some reason. Most of the time it is the inability fo their country to create a social structure that balances security with freedom at a level of peace and harmony.
To this point. I do not know if this statute is the right one. I could have easily constrewed a statute tha stayed in the bounds of non racial profiling based on state id carrying and it is an infraction and you are going down town to be fingerprinted and processed. Which is the proper way. As it is the same thing without the stupid racist language of profiling. Then again, profiling is used heavily and is relied on and I am all for it. Just theire should be legal recourse against it if it is abused. This statute seems like it could have been better written to recieve the same end game.

[PDD]

Bea should have recused himself. However, this does set up another point for AZ to appeal. It is also obvious that some people on this blog have never been to one of the border states or they would understand the dilemma. I have recently moved to the SW and having lived in Florida where there are a lot of illegals, it pales to what is going on here. Californa spends almost $10bil (yes BILLION dollars) a year on educating illegal aliens (this does not include the billons it spends on health care, housing, and then there's those that are incarcerated). Yet my kids (born in GA to US Citizens) have to pay elevated college costs because the state cuts the "State Funding" to these schools because they don't have the money. Yes, these people pay "sales tax", but they pay no taxes toward ANYTHING else. This has to stop. Those who are here LEGALLY - WELCOME!!! Those who are here ILLEGALLY - go the heck home and come here legally!!!

This following was written by a CA teacher and it clearly spells out just how much this costs the US CALIFORNIA CITIZEN that IS paying for the illegals.

"Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or 6.00/hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return, he gets an “earned income credit” of up to $3,200 free.

He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.

He qualifies for food stamps.

He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.

His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.

He requires bilingual teachers and books.

He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.

If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI. Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer’s expense.

He doesn’t worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.

Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.

He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.

Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/hour left after paying their bills and his.

The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean up.

Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people!"

[Sam]

If the government actually cracked down on employers hiring illegal immigrants, they would stop coming across the border because there would be no jobs for them. But the fact is that corporate America wants to keep exploiting this cheap source of labor, and since corporate America owns Congress, real reform is next to impossible.

[Aridzonan]

The majority of these protesters are probably here illegally.
ROUND THEM UP, AND SHIP THEM OUT!

[Manuel Alderete]

Talk about closing the barn door after the horse is out:

90% of Arizona "Hispanics" Under 18 Are Citizens
(Wall Street Journal)

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/04/29/most-growth-in-arizona-hispanic-population-comes-from-births-of-new-us-citizens/