Now that a federal judge has put on hold the most controversial elements of Arizona's anti-illegal immigration law, we recommend that Utah state Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, and other legislators, not push a bill that would mirror Arizona's intentions, which include requiring law enforcement officers to check a person's identification in certain situations.
Other provisions of Arizona's law, including a requirement that immigrants carry their papers with them at all times, was also blocked by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton. The judge, who was appointed to the bench by former President Bill Clinton, wants many provisions on hold until they are decided by higher courts. Arizona's Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law, promises to appeal the ruling as far as the Supreme Court. Indeed, the ruling was appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday.
Bolton's is not the final arbiter of the law and Rep. Sandstrom and others should keep that in mind. We are a long ways from deciding whether Arizona's law passes constitutional muster. The next stop, the 9th Circuit Court, based in San Francisco, generally trends to the left and that makes it likely to echo or even increase Bolton's ruling against the law.
But whatever happens there, the case will then move to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's anyone's guess which side will prevail there. The high court is comprised of four conservative justices, four liberal justices, and one center right justice, Anthony Kennedy, who may be the final vote that determines if SB1070 eventually becomes law.
The long path to a resolution over SB1070 is the chief reason Sandstrom and others should cool their heels over having Utah try to emulate Arizona. If a similar bill is passed and signed into law in Utah, its implementation will certainly be delayed, given the precedence on Judge Bolton's ruling. State legislators would be wasting taxpayers' time and money if they go ahead with legislation.
Despite Bolton's ruling, portions of SB1070 have been OK'd by Bolton. Although lost in the larger news story, the judge did deliver illegal immigration opponents a victory when she upheld the portion that bars local governments from restricting the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
In other words, so-called "sanctuary cities" that prevent federal enforcement of immigration are illegal in Arizona.
Comments