From Homeland Security NewsWire:
Civil rights groups seek to block Utah's immigration law
Published 5 May 2011
On Tuesday, two civil rights and immigration advocacy groups filed lawsuits against Utah in an attempt to stop a tough Arizona-style law from taking effect; Utah's immigration law is scheduled to take hold on 10 May and comes after legislators made many compromises to draft a bill that they thought would avoid legal challenges; the American Civil Liberties and Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Law Center brought forth a class-action lawsuit against the law on the grounds that it interferes with the federal government's responsibility to enforce immigration; Utah's attorney general is determined to defend the law
On Tuesday, two civil rights and immigration advocacy groups filed lawsuits against Utah in an attempt to stop a tough Arizona-style law from taking effect.
Utah’s immigration law is scheduled to take hold on 10 May and comes after legislators made many compromises to draft a bill that they thought would avoid legal challenges, but the American Civil Liberties and Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Law Center brought forth a class-action lawsuit against the law on the grounds that it interferes with the federal government’s responsibility to enforce immigration.
Speaking against the bill, Linton Joaquin, the general counsel of the National Immigration Law Center, said, “Federal immigration law leaves no room for this kind of intrusive state legislation.”
The law, HB 497, is based on Arizona’s controversial SB 1070, but contains provisions that were designedto soften the law.
While the Arizona lawmandated that individuals must carry immigration papers at all times and required law enforcement officials to check an individual’s immigration status, the Utah law does not make it a crime to not carry identification and officers are only allowed to investigate an individual’s immigration status after they have been arrested for a felony or misdemeanor.
Despite these changes Cecilia Wang of the ACLU says that the law still impedes on civil liberties.
“The statute violates everyone’s civil rights,” Wang said. “The practical effect is that people will have to carry their ID with them at all times.”
Mark Shurtleff, Utah’s attorney general, is determined to defend the law. According to Shurtleff, the Utah law was written after carefully studying the Arizona law, which was suspended by a federal judge. Shurtleff says that the Utah law takes great pains to avoid racial profiling and only codifies existing routine practices.
HB 497 was passed at the same time as two other pro-immigration bills. One bill provides permits for illegal immigrants to work within the state and the other sets up a partnership with the northern Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to bring in guest workers under an existing federal program.
Civil rights groups seek to block Utah's immigration law
Published 5 May 2011
On Tuesday, two civil rights and immigration advocacy groups filed lawsuits against Utah in an attempt to stop a tough Arizona-style law from taking effect; Utah's immigration law is scheduled to take hold on 10 May and comes after legislators made many compromises to draft a bill that they thought would avoid legal challenges; the American Civil Liberties and Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Law Center brought forth a class-action lawsuit against the law on the grounds that it interferes with the federal government's responsibility to enforce immigration; Utah's attorney general is determined to defend the law
On Tuesday, two civil rights and immigration advocacy groups filed lawsuits against Utah in an attempt to stop a tough Arizona-style law from taking effect.
Utah’s immigration law is scheduled to take hold on 10 May and comes after legislators made many compromises to draft a bill that they thought would avoid legal challenges, but the American Civil Liberties and Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Law Center brought forth a class-action lawsuit against the law on the grounds that it interferes with the federal government’s responsibility to enforce immigration.
Speaking against the bill, Linton Joaquin, the general counsel of the National Immigration Law Center, said, “Federal immigration law leaves no room for this kind of intrusive state legislation.”
The law, HB 497, is based on Arizona’s controversial SB 1070, but contains provisions that were designedto soften the law.
While the Arizona lawmandated that individuals must carry immigration papers at all times and required law enforcement officials to check an individual’s immigration status, the Utah law does not make it a crime to not carry identification and officers are only allowed to investigate an individual’s immigration status after they have been arrested for a felony or misdemeanor.
Despite these changes Cecilia Wang of the ACLU says that the law still impedes on civil liberties.
“The statute violates everyone’s civil rights,” Wang said. “The practical effect is that people will have to carry their ID with them at all times.”
Mark Shurtleff, Utah’s attorney general, is determined to defend the law. According to Shurtleff, the Utah law was written after carefully studying the Arizona law, which was suspended by a federal judge. Shurtleff says that the Utah law takes great pains to avoid racial profiling and only codifies existing routine practices.
HB 497 was passed at the same time as two other pro-immigration bills. One bill provides permits for illegal immigrants to work within the state and the other sets up a partnership with the northern Mexican state of Nuevo Leon to bring in guest workers under an existing federal program.
No comments:
Post a Comment