Judge Neuters Arizona Immigration Law

"Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens"

This article is from the archive of our partner .

The most controversial elements of Arizona's immigration law have been blocked by a federal judge. Major provisions, such as one requiring authorities to check the immigration status of individuals while enforcing other laws, will not go into effect. U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton also barred the state from requiring immigrants to carry their papers at all times. While this isn't the last say on the Arizona law, it's a major victory for the bill's opponents. Here's what observers are looking at now and anticipating for the future:

  • Show's the Government's Case Is Strong, says attorney David W. Leopold, who has previously argued against the Arizona law: "I think it is also important to point out that this is a preliminary injunction. Judges rarely do that. It shows the strength of the government's case. It will definitely effect the next steps that Arizona will take. This is major."
  • What Do We Know About the Judge Who Made the Decision?  Fox News legal analyst Peter Johnson explains: "This judge, appointed by President Bill Clinton, prior to that a state court, formerly a registered Democrat, then became an Independent... has a reputation for independence, a reputation for getting to the issues quickly and an unpredictability as well."

  • This Is Likely Headed for the Supreme Court, forecasts Jeffrey Toobin, a CNN legal analyst and New Yorker staff writer: "I think this is a case very much destined for United States Supreme Court. It is the kind of big issue relating to the responsibilities of state versus federal government on a very important matter, so it's likely, given how much attention this law received that other states will be passing similar laws. I think the Supreme Court will get involved probably next year. The issue that's up in the air is will the law be in effect while the appeals process goes forward? At the moment the answer is no at least this one provision. But certainly an appeals process will begin. If not immediately, then soon."
  • Get Comfortable, People  Mark Krikorian at National Review writes: "Everyone understood this would take several years and reach the Supreme Court. It’s a stupid way to make policy, but with ACLU lawyers (both those inside and those outside the government) fanatically committed to open borders, there’s no alternative."
This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.