Posted by
The Supreme Court has agreed to review Arizona v. United States,
the case regarding SB 1070, the Arizona law (only) four sections of
which have been enjoined by the lower courts: requiring police to check
the immigration status of anyone they have lawfully detained whom they
have reasonable suspicion to believe may be in the country illegally;
making it a state crime to violate federal alien registration laws;
making it a state crime for illegal aliens to apply for work, solicit
work in a public place, or work as an independent contractor; and
permitting warrantless arrests where the police have probable cause to
believe that a suspect has committed a crime that makes him subject to
deportation. For my previous analysis of SB 1070 and the legal
challenges to it, see here, here, here, and here.
By taking up this case, the Supreme Court is wisely nipping in the
bud the proliferation of state laws aimed at addressing our broken
immigration system. One way or another, states will know how far they
can go in addressing issues relating to illegal immigrants, whether the
concern is crime, employment opportunities (providing or restricting
them), registration requirements, or even so-called sanctuary cities.
Of course, states wouldn’t be getting into this mess if the federal
government — elected officials of both parties — hadn’t abdicated its
responsibility to fix a system that serves nobody’s interests: not big
business or small business, not the rich or the poor, not the most or
least educated, not the economy or national security, and certainly not
the average taxpayer. For their part, SB 1070 and related laws in
Alabama, Georgia, and elsewhere are (with small exception)
constitutional — the state laws are merely mirroring federal law, not
conflicting with it or otherwise intruding on federal authority over
immigration — but bad public policy. (For more on both these
conclusions, read my SCOTUSblog essay from last summer.)
What this country needs is a comprehensive reform that obviates the
sort of ineffectual half-measures the states are left with given
Congress’s shameless refusal to act. It’s not very often that Cato
calls for the federal government to do something, but the immigration
system is quite possibly the most screwed-up part of the federal
government — which of itself is a significant statement coming from
someone at Cato — and one that is so incredibly counterproductive to
American liberty and prosperity.
The Court will hear Arizona v. United States in the spring. For more immigration-reform developments, see this note in today’s Wall Street Journal and my blogpost on Utah’s plan, which the federal government has also since sued to enjoin.
No comments:
Post a Comment