Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A U.S. District Court judge in Phoenix upheld the constitutionality of Arizona's employer sanctions law Thursday, saying it does not usurp the authority of federal laws.
Judge Neil Wake issued the decision after holding a hearing on the case in January. Earlier, he had denied requests by to block the law from going into effect.
Arizona Republic article (broken link)
And; that law will spawn many others.......across the USA
It didn't happen in Pennsylvania, other courts aren't held to Wake's ruling.
The issue is already pending before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,
because the business groups challenging the law already had appealed an earlier order by Wake earlier in the case.
They are expected to challenge the new ruling also.
Wake's ruling is six months after a federal judge in Pennsylvania made a very different decision.
In the Pennsylvania case, that federal judge voided a city law that sought to punish those who hire or rent to people in the country illegally,
that judge's ruling held that the restrictions were pre-empted by federal law.
Neither the ruling in the Pennsylvania case, nor in the Wake's case are binding legal precedents on other courts.
Just as the prosecutors have agreed to hold off on any prosecutions, everyone else will just have to wait til this continues to wend it's way through the courts.
.
..
The main thrust of the law as I see it is to deny a business license as penalty for 'hiring illegals'.
One problem I see, (beyond the constitutionality argument which will have to be played out in the courts); ...but one of the problems I see is that the employers have a free pass written into the Arizona law if they just sign up on a form that will exempt them from responsibility if they've checked into an already proven to be faulty government database.
That means they can adhere to the letter of the Arizona law, but since the database is insufficient, they will still be able to be out of compliance with the intent of the law. Even if a complaint is brought which proves they are out of compliance, they will still be able to escape any penalty or consequence if they've merely signed onto an unreliable federal data gathering program.
No teeth in the law, .....it might sound tough, but read the exemptions.
Check what the lawyers are telling their clients in Arizona about this law, ...even if the law is upheld, there is a built in pass for employers.
That's not uncommon, there's plenty of laws that sound better than they ever will perform in the real world.
Do we want something, anything, just because it sounds good, or do we want what's best to deal most effectively with the problem.
Someone in the state is trying to find a way to fight the exploitation of immigrant labor, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that, other than it should be enforced on a federal level, but Arizona hasn't seemed to look into the downside of enacting that law.
I'm not convinced they even understand how easily it will be to go around it, if or when it does get applied.
More and more, it sounds to me that some Arizonans have convinced themselves it's a great deal before they've looked at what it might really mean in the long run.
By not insisting the law is dealt with on a federal level, the whole thing is diluted on a federal level by the various state efforts that won't have any consistency from one state to the next.
The feds should be uniformly responsible so that corporations can't just move to another jurisdiction to escape various state laws, and don't think they won't. Besides the economic disruption of industry moving operations to whichever jurisdiction best serves their needs, you have to think about the social costs of that same movement.
The federal laws we need are already on the books, those laws have already passed the test of constitutionality and they just need an administration who will enforce them.
Leaving it up to the states is not the right approach. That only let's the feds off the hook, and creates unnecessary costs for the states as they try to duplicate what is already in place.
This is one area where fed law should supercede state law because the states aren't equipped to deal with all the fall out from having to try to do it for themselves.
I've long advocated busting the people who want to exploit immigrant labor, but this law doesn't adequately guarantee that will happen.
Just as the current administration is no guarantee that our present federal laws will be effective.
To whom it may concern: employers are already checking SSN's pretty closely as of late--------I can see the differences here with my own two eyes.
The illegals (most of whom are Spanish speaking Mestizos) are bugging out in waves, much less 'Mariachi' music blaring along with far fewer pickups with 'DURANGO' etc. plastered across their back windows.
Yes; the illegals are becoming 'thin on the ground'
To whom it may concern: employers are already checking SSN's pretty closely as of late--------I can see the differences here with my own two eyes.
The illegals (most of whom are Spanish speaking Mestizos) are bugging out in waves, much less 'Mariachi' music blaring along with far fewer pickups with 'DURANGO' etc. plastered across their back windows.
Yes; the illegals are becoming 'thin on the ground'
You know.. illegals aren't the only ones who play Mariachi music.
Older Mexicans = Mariachi
Younger Mexicans = Banda
Classier Mexicans = Spanish Rock
Mexican Americans = 50 Cent
To whom it may concern: employers are already checking SSN's pretty closely as of late--------I can see the differences here with my own two eyes.
Many employers have been doing the checks since Jan 1. And, the impact of the law is seen already in AZ as you say. One school is having to close due to sudden lack of students
This decision, along with the County Attorney's pledge to start filing cases beginning March 1, will only go to spur on those employers who were holding out waiting for this decision to come down.
This decision was, IMO, a good one. And, IMO, it will be affirmed on appeal. It would be my hope that ultimately it gets to the USSC. AND, if the Court affirms this law - that will then really be a banner day for the rule of law in the United States.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
