Federal judge puts breaks on controversial parts of Arizona immigration law

This is good news, but lawyers for Gov. Brewer are expected to appeal and this may go the United States Supreme Court:

A federal judge on Friday, weighing in a clash between the federal government and a state over immigration policy, blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona’s immigration enforcement law from going into effect.

In a ruling on a law that has rocked politics coast to coast and thrown a spotlight on a border state’s fierce debate over immigration, Judge Susan Bolton of Federal District Court here said that some aspects of the law can go into effect as scheduled on Thursday.

But Judge Bolton took aim at the parts of the law that have generated the most controversy, issuing a preliminary injunction against sections that called for police officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times.

Judge Bolton put those sections on hold while she continued to hear the larger issues in the challenges to the law.

“Preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely pre-empted by federal law to be enforced,” she said.

“There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens,” she wrote. “By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”

Arizona immigration law prompts bigots to come out into the light of day

So I haven't blogged about this yet, but it has been a topic of many conversations in my daily life for a good few days now.

I'm talking about the Arizona immigration law, SB 1070, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer.

The law is the strictest immigration law in the country, and even before it was signed into law, the proposal received heat from critics about its potential impacts. According the The New York Times:

The law, which proponents and critics alike said was the broadest and strictest immigration measure in generations, would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. Opponents have called it an open invitation for harassment and discrimination against Hispanics regardless of their citizenship status.

Well, in further news about why Arizona fails, read here (Arizona legislators try to pass bill that says Obama must prove citizenship), here (Arizona grades experienced teachers on fluency), and here (legislators take issue with ethnic studies programs). Feel free to debate these topics thoughtfully and carefully in comments. I'll be moderating the thread pretty closely.

I have had people debate with me about whether or not this law and its implications are racist. They have all been debates with white people. For example, on May 1 I posted a status on my Facebook account that read: "Do I look 'illegal'?" and quickly I had a white friend of mine respond. I debated with him for a time, and eventually he said, "Also, as cliche as this may be... STEREOTYPES EXIST FOR A REASON!"

To put it briefly, it was his justification for racial profiling. And it disgusted me. He has always held problematic, racist beliefs, but generally he keeps them to himself. It was as if he took this status of mine as an opportunity to let loose all of his hatred.

For this reason, the Arizona law, at the very least, is prompting racist individuals to be loud and proud about their bigotry in a new, heightened manner. As an Hispanic American (born in the states) whose father was born in Mexico, and an individual who is deeply against racism directed at any people, this disturbs me deeply. Go ahead and argue the legality of the law. What can't be denied is that this has prompted a fresh wave of attacks against a group of people based on their legal status as related to their skin color.

And that's called racism.

EDIT 4:17 pm, 5/4/10: via Feministing, "The Far-Right Movement Behind Arizona Copycat Bills"

EDIT 5/5/10: I'm going to put a trigger warning in effect for the comments. I had moderation off and some got through before I was able to get back at my computer. They will stay up because people have responded to them.

Immigrant families incarcerated?

Wow. This might not be a strictly feminist issue, but the idea of detaining immigrant families who are seeking asylum needs to be discussed. I really don't understand how this is the first time I had heard about this? The T. Don Hutto Residential Center, in Taylor, Texas, detains non-criminal, non-Mexican immigrant families as they await their immigration hearings or their return to their countries of origin. It was a former medium-security prison, and nearly half the detainees have been children. Fortunately, the facility has been undergoing some policy changes to make it more friendly for the families who are detained there.

“The detention of immigrants is the fastest-growing form of incarceration in this country, and, with the support of the Bush Administration, it is becoming a lucrative business."

Please read this article from The American Civil Liberties Union, and this one from The New Yorker.

Thanks to Feministe for bringing this to my attention.