Are you an Employer?    Attract the Best Candidates with Smart Job Postings! Search Legal Resumes
Legal Jobs Board for Attorneys, Law Students & Legal Staff | Serving USA & Other Countries | LawCrossing

 
Job Seekers?   

Need Help? Call (800) 973-1177 
ATTORNEY JOBS
LAW STUDENT JOBS
LEGAL STAFF JOBS
Download LawCrossing Online Apps: Apple iOS
 
See Law Jobs We Have Recently Researched and Located for You
What Where
Show Recruiter Jobs  

Show Refreshed Jobs  



Search in Job Title Only
Location 
Job Type:
Employer Type:

+ Browse Legal Jobs     + Advanced Search     + Search Tips     + Upload Legal Resume
Legal Jobs >> Legal Articles >> Legal Daily News Feature >> Arizona Immigration Law Debate Puts Fed V State Jurisdiction Center-stage
  • Legal Daily News Feature

Arizona Immigration Law Debate Puts Fed v State Jurisdiction Center-stage



04/23/12

The U.S. Supreme Court is going to sit in judgment this week over Arizona v. United States, No. 11-182, and the ramifications are many. One of the political consequences could be that the judgment would influence the presidential race: If Arizona wins then Obama loses face and Romney would have cause to cheer, if Arizona loses, then the consequences would favor Obama. However, of far greater importance to the people of U.S. is how the U.S. Supreme Court interprets the rights of Fed v State in the matter of lawmaking and implementation.

In the middle is the judicial system of the country, which time and again has tried to uphold the rule of law, and has found itself criticized by Mr. Obama as an ‘unelected’ body nosing into the affairs of legislatures. From healthcare, through federal authority superseding state laws in medical marijuana, to the present challenge to the rights of Arizona over its own immigration laws, the Obama administration has time and again sparked off the debate. The recent case in the Supreme Court is of consequence because of this – the way the authority of Arizona is defined would affect the working of many states that are similarly tied to the United States concept.

The Issues:

Does federal immigration law pre-empt and bar the key provisions of Arizona’s law?
Related Article
Supreme Court Trashes Obama Administration’s Logic against Arizona Immigration Law

On Wednesday, the majority of the Supreme Court justices clearly seemed to hold with the logic for Arizona’s immigration law rather than against it. In absence of any radical political manipulation, it is safe to assume that the lawyers on behalf of Arizona did a good job, while the Obama administration's l ....

High Court Upholds Arizona Immigration Law

Last week, the Supreme Court supported a controversial Arizona law that gives the state the authority to shut down businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Under the law, employers must check the work-authorization status of all employees through an electronic verification system. Any employer who f ....

Alabama's HB 56 Illegal Immigration Law Surpasses Even Arizona's Controversial SB 1070



Alabama's got Arizona beat. ....

The provisions in question are:

• Checking the immigration status of anyone detained and suspected of being illegally in the country
• The requirement for immigrants to carry their papers at all times
• Banning illegal immigrants from soliciting work in public places
• Arresting of illegal immigrants without a warrant if an officer suspects they have committed a crime making them liable for deportation

The key issue, of course, is the Latino vote bank which forms 16 percent of the present population of U.S. Romney is already not favored by Hispanic illegal immigrants, and Obama is all out against checking immigrant status, as the 11.5 million illegal immigrants can decide the presidency if they can manage to cast votes.

As Paul Clement, the attorney for Arizona says, “This is another federalism case. This is not all about immigration. It's really about the relationship between the federal government and the state government. It's the norm that you have state officials enforcing federal law.”

A recent Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll already found that Americans generally support Arizona and are undecided about the Fed v State debate at the core of the case. The opinion poll found close to seventy percent of those surveyed favoring state laws that allow police to check a person’s immigration status and criminalize illegal immigrants working in the U.S.A. As usual, in most regions of U.S. the debate has become a mindless Democrat v Republican thing with partisans giving little thought to the actual implications upon the institution of federal democracy.
Share      
     
Rate This Article
   View top rated articles

Printable Version    Printable Version PDF Version    PDF Version Email to a Friend    Email to a Friend
Comment    Post A Comment View Comment    View Comment Discuss    Discuss

Featured Testimonials

After using LawCrossingfor a little over a week, I found a great position. Thanks so much.
Marc

Facts

LawCrossing Fact #199: You have a better chance of landing the job you want if you use LawCrossing because there are fewer qualified candidates with whom you are competing.

"We want to hear your thoughts. Please comment on this article (below)!"

Comments


Article ID: 7650    

Article Title: Arizona Immigration Law Debate Puts Fed v State Jurisdiction Center-stage

Comment not found for this article.

Comment Comment

Facebook comments:


total jobs
97,108
Upload Your Resume
New Legal Jobs in Last 7 Days
13,721
Facebook Twitter
job search tip
Gaps in employment? It doesn't have to be a problem. Just be prepared to explain why you were out of work.
LawCrossing



The Job Search Program that Guarantees Success.
Our career counselor creates a tailor-made job search strategy for you and walks you through every step of the process.
Create your unique brand for just $2,495!
2013 Most Influential Legal Recruiter Rankings
Get the ranking

Your privacy is guaranteed. We will never give out, lease, or sell your personal information.




Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss it, you will land among the stars.