Looking for details, stay tuned. Scroll for continued updates throughout the day.


Okay, the law will go into effect Thursday night but without certain provisions. Fox reporting new law cannot make it a crime to not carry immigration papers, blocking way to determine immigration status.

The main point is you cannot create a new law that the Feds don’t have, like carrying immigration papers, an addition or change. Arizona could ask judge to stay her own ruling while they go immediate to the 9th Circuit, the most overturned circuit in America, which could happen today.

“Partial injunction” is the phrase being used. Everyone is scrambling to get exactly what is out. If there is no way for an officer to directly determine if someone is here illegally, i.e. the stopped person has no American I.D. it would make the law more difficult to apply. Arguments of “racial profiling” of course would also be used. AZ of course could also simply take everyone in who breaks the law including misdemeanors, driving without a license, etc.

AP: Judge blocks parts of Arizona immigration law

Sheriff Deaver asks all who support Arizona go to http://www.bordersheriffs.com/ to help

Also stay in touch with Governor Jan Brewer and support Arizona at www.az.gov

UPDATE 7/28 130pm PT:

Statement from Gov Jan Brewer. Here’s a snippet, click through for full statement.

“This fight is far from over. In fact, it is just the beginning, and at the end of what is certain to be a long legal struggle, Arizona will prevail in its right to protect our citizens. I am deeply grateful for the overwhelmingly support we have received from across our nation in our efforts to defend against the failures of the federal government.

“I have consulted with my legal counsel about our next steps. We will take a close look at every single element Judge Bolton removed from the law, and we will soon file an expedited appeal at the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

PDF of Arizona law ruling

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
28 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. noflyzone says:

    don’t dance around too much liberals–what is 1000 times worse than a bloodbath is coming your way this november. something evil is going down in this country. i have my own theories what it is, but i won’t spill it here.

  2. noflyzone says:

    what’s wrong with arizona adopting and enforcing the federal immigration law?

    • cwsjd says:

      To answer your question: Nothing is wrong with it. The problem with the new law is that the state cannot make new laws which exceed the federal law. In part, that is why the judge struck some of it down. She did not strike down anything that is either: 1) not beyond the scope of federal law, and 2) does not conflict with existing federal law. For example, there is no federal law that makes it a crime for an illegal alien to be in the U.S. The AZ law made it a crime; this the state cannot do. On the other hand, there is federal law that makes it a crime to employ an illegal alien. That part of the AZ law was left intact by the judge.

      • noflyzone says:

        i was hot under the collar and didn’t explain myself well. i think dumb insolence is called for in this situation. what i mean by that is, on a temporary basis until this matter is settled in court, the state of arizona should enforce every provision of federal immigration law there is. show no mercy!

        when challenged by the feds that only federal officers can enforce federal law, fall on that old, worn out shibboleth “i was just doing my job, protecting the citizens of arizona.” what are urkel and his baby brother eric going to do–put brewer in jail? i would love to see that, a governor going to jail for protecting her citzens.

        on another show today, i heard people, including one in the military, say screw the judge, proceed with the law anyway. the host who shall remain nameless said lawbreaking only gets you in trouble. that’s why i propose the dumb insolence route.

        • cwsjd says:

          I understand your point. But nothing in Judge Bolton’s ruling stops Arizona from enforcing federal immigration laws. I am certain the state will continue to do so. Sheriff Joe has already said so, and I hope he does. The problem is that the state statute conflicts with laws established by Congress and Congress gets the last word. Arizona’s law can be fixed and part of Judge Bolton’s order makes that clear. I hope the state does that, too. As a conservative constitutional lawyer, I’m sorry to admit that the judge got this right. But keep in mind that the vast majority of Arizona’s law will go into effect tomorrow as planned, including criminal sanctions against employers who hire illegal aliens. There is a lot of room for hope — and not Obama’s style of hope.

  3. franknitti says:

    Well, we’re officially in Bad Day at Black Rock now. The law is no more and we are being ruled over by the apes.

  4. aliencats says:

    It is a Federal crime not to have documentation showing legal status. I know. INS spent 30 min explaining the laws to my husband. Maybe it is only for those from the terrorist rich nation of New Zealand?

    • cwsjd says:

      It is a crime for legal aliens not to have proof of their status. It is not a federal crime for illegal aliens not to have documentation of their status. The state of Arizona cannot make that a crime because the federal law pre-empts state law. As funny as this sounds, it is the law and the judge got it right. Our solution to both the Arizona law and immigration problems lies with Congress. The whole mess can be fixed so easily, but this Congress will never do it for political reasons. We need to take Congress back.

  5. aliencats says:

    It is federal felony to be in this counry illegally. Under Title 8 Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, “Improper Entry by Alien,” any citizen of any country other than the United States who:
    Enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers; or
    Eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers; or
    Attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact;
    has committed a federal crime.
    Violations are punishable by criminal fines and imprisonment for up to six months. Repeat offenses can bring up to two years in prison. Additional civil fines may be imposed at the discretion of immigration judges, but civil fines do not negate the criminal sanctions or nature of the offense.

    • cwsjd says:

      Read the statute carefully. It is a crime to enter the U.S. illegally. However, there is no federal statute that makes it a crime to be in the U.S. illegally. Those are two entirely different acts; one is a federal crime, the other is not. Congress has repeatedly had the opportunity to change the law in this regard and has steadfastly refused to do so. Arizona cannot, therefore, make it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally because federal law pre-empts the states. That has been true for 200 years in many areas of the law. I wish it were otherwise, but until we take back Congress and fix the laws, states can only go so far with enacting their own laws. Sorry to say it, but Judge Bolton got this right and not on political grounds.

      • Pat_S says:

        Hey, maybe John McCain will sponsor a law making it a federal crime to be in the country illegally. What do you think? He sure has been sounding like a tough guy on illegal immigration.

        Was that a pig flying by?

        • noflyzone says:

          i think congress should pass a law making it illegal to be john mccain!

          • Artgal says:

            LOL! I like that idea!

            I’m disappointed about the ruling, but it was not a complete surprise. We’re still holding our rallies tomorrow to support our state, SB1070 and our governor. Gov. Brewer is right – this is only the beginning!

            On Saturday night, I’ve learned there will be a rally in the state capitol at 1700 W. Washington – Phoenix. If you’re in the area, come on out! There will be lots of guests from law enforcement (including Sheriff Joe), state senate (Russell Pierce) and activists such as Ted Hayes. I understand a lot of guests are lined up.

            Say a prayer everyone. This is not over yet! They want us to be disappointed and feel like there’s nothing we can do to stop them. They want us to get tired and retreat. I have news for these freaks: Ain’t effing happening!

        • cwsjd says:

          Pat: The voters of Arizona have a great opportunity this fall to make it illegal for John McCain to continue to be the state’s U.S. senator. I hope they exercise that right by defeating him in the primary and electing J.D. Hayworth. Every election cycle, McCain starts talking like a conservative. After the election, he votes like a liberal. I’m weary of that behavior in far too many Republicans. (By the way, you and I have often conversed on Twitter. You’re terrific.)

      • Maynard says:

        Your analysis doesn’t make sense, at least not to my civilian mind. You acknowledge it’s a crime to enter the U.S. illegally. So that says anyone that entered illegally (as opposed to someone who crossed over legally and then overstayed, which would be another scenario) is a criminal. If they arrest you for robbing a bank, you can’t get off by saying that you robbed the bank yesterday, but you’re not robbing a bank right now. Someone who is found in this country without having registered his entry has committed a crime. This should be prosecutable unless you want to allege it’s beyond the statute of limitations. What am I missing?

        Elsewhere you say that if you’re a legal alien, then you must prove your legal status under penalty of law. However, if you’re an illegal alien, there is no penalty of law for not being able to prove your legal status, nor is there any penalty of law for being illegal. If that’s true, then the law you describe serves no other purpose than to harass legal aliens. A scenario that pointless wouldn’t make any sense. I’m not saying it isn’t so, but what you’re describing is insane.

        Again, I’m a civilian, and I expect things to make sense in a commonsense kind of way. Maybe I’m unreasonable in this, but I don’t think I’m being unreasonable in expecting to live in a world I’m capable of understanding, or at least I should be able to understand the rules of my own country. This is crazy stuff going on. When the nice officer stops me, I’ve got to prove I’m a licensed driver, and that my car is registered and insured. I’ve got to identify myself to my bank, and I’ve got to pay my taxes. I have every reason to believe I’ll get stomped hard by my government if I don’t do these things. Likewise, when I’ve been abroad, I keep my papers on my person at all times. I’m happy to carry my share of the burden and I’m not complaining, except when I get the feeling I’m being played for a fool. Why do we have two sets of rules, one for people that play by the rules and one for people that break the rules? Am I naive in saying the American ideal is equal protection under the law?

        • cwsjd says:

          Maynard, you are right to be frustrated. The government could prosecute illegals for entering the country illegally; but absent proof of how and when the illegal actually entered the country, the prosecution would fail. Besides, you can well imagine the mess in the federal courts should the government try to vainly prosecute illegals for entering the country. The better solution is for Congress to pass a one-line statute that makes it a crime for illegal aliens to be IN the U.S. Currently, being illegally in the U.S. is a civil infraction, much like running a stop sign. Congress can change that, but has never had the political will to do so. The politicians, mostly liberals but not exclusively so, see the illegals as a voting block. The issue of illegal aliens is clearly a double-standard as you point out. Conservatives in control of Congress and the White House can fix the problem.

  6. wastubbs says:

    I am more worried about me, than the plight of illegal people. Im sorry just my view.

  7. RobbieK says:

    Looks like we have an activist Judge on our hands! Her ruling actually violates Federal Immigration Law. Her decision will be changed, or this will be overturned on appeal. If the Supreme Court gets it, she’ll get chastised.

  8. thierry says:

    the urkel circus i mean administration should just go for consistency here and also strive to not enforce the healthcare law. and states and individuals should just cherry pick the laws they’d like to enforce and /or obey and act accordingly.

    chaos. it’s called willful chaos to trigger despotism as necessary to restore “order”.

  9. Laura says:

    If illegals do not have to show proof of documentation I am not going to show proof of having health care insurance to the IRS.

    The government doesn’t want to get bogged down with dealing with the illegals in our country yet they will create a massive new branch of IRS agents to make sure American citizens purchase health care insurance. This administration is all about wiping out the entire American middle class in every aspect; financial, health, freedom in favor of foreign invaders yes we are officially living under a dictatorship.

    • aardvark says:

      You got it, Laura – google Cloward-Piven. It’s the strategy of collapsing the government by making everyone completely dependent on it for everything. Of course, the government cannot possibly stand the overwhelming burden, and will entirely collapse. The theory is that then the radicals (Marxists, etc.) can come in at that point and completely re-make society in the fashion they choose because EVERYONE will be helpless — or begging them to “do something!”

      As to the idea of not showing proof of health care coverage (which I assume you weren’t 100% serious about), there’s a biiiig problem. Unlike the low level penalties usually cited for non-compliance with the census ($100) which would cost the government more than it would be worth to pursue, the DeathCare Bill had provisions allowing the IRS direct access to your bank accounts. I imagine the gov’t. would LOVE to snag a hefty chunk from every protester’s accounts. I also am thinking the penalties will escalate rapidly.

      We need to VOTE THE BA****** OUT and reverse it all!

  10. Chuck says:

    The judge struck down the provision that would have granted AZ the right to check the immigration status even of people already under arrest for some other crime. That to me, is mind boggling. No matter if a person has been arrested 10,000 times, they cannot ask for immigration status? The argument about “protecting legal citizens” is specious and insane. Further, since it is not against a law for an illegal alien to apply for a job, wait for the sure next step: a legal challenge to the employment-verification system (E-Verify), under some crazy reason, like “since illegals can apply for a job, they have the right to obtain one, therefore, the system is against the law” or something like that.

    Liberals, illegal aliens, and immigration ambulance-chasers are celebrating now. They don’t have idea of what will be coming in November, and I hope it will be catastrophic for them. I can’t hardly wait.

    • cwsjd says:

      The weakest, and possibly incorrect part of the Order is the provision you have cited. Judge Bolton accepted without any documentation the federal government’s argument that if the state of Arizona uses federal data bases and other resources to check the status of an alien, it would be a burden on the government. If the Order gets overturned, it will be on this basis because the federal government cannot prove the assertion that its resources will be overtaxed and burdened by Arizona. On the brighter side, the Order upholds Arizona’s position that knowingly hiring an illegal alien is a state crime. That is where enforcement should be concentrated anyway. With very minor adjustments, the federal statutes can be fixed if we had a Congress that wanted to actually fix it. For example, Congress can make it a federal crime for an illegal alien to be in the U.S. Despite numerous opportunities, as Judge Bolton points out, it has refused to enact that as law. That single provision would go a long way toward solving the whole problem. We need to take back Congress.

  11. thierry says:

    in my experience (with a large illegal workforce through the years) is that nothing triggers a federal crackdown on an illegal alien than if they determine they owe tax money. the government doesn’t care who they kill or what child they rape or what citizen they screw out of a job or what citizen’s SSN they steal- the federal government only seeks to enforce its own laws when they do not get their tax money. and when they do drop the hammer, they do nothing to the criminal who slinks off into the shadows after the company that employs them is forced to fire them.

    the feds don’t even generally care if a SSN is being used fraudulently- if you are an employer you find this out when the real owner of that number calls you screaming from another state. but they will bring the heat if they smell tax money gone unpaid.

    and for the record an employer is required by federal law to ask potential employees for their papers – and the types acceptable are listed along with a number to call to verify SSNs -to prove they are entitled to work in the usa. how is this legal when asking someone for the same information when suspected of a crime is supposedly forbidden? i’m not a federal employee( or a peace officer) and i’ve asked people for their papers dozens of times- and i was personally susceptible along with my company to fines and criminal charges if i falsified that information knowingly. it’s absurd.

    it seems to me that it’s the federal government that is libel for all the crimes against american citizens committed by illegals- particularly if the criminals were turned into and then released by ICE. if possible this avenue should be pursued in earnest.

    the theater of the absurd always leads to the circus of cruelty.

    • cwsjd says:

      Thierry wrote: and for the record an employer is required by federal law to ask potential employees for their papers – and the types acceptable are listed along with a number to call to verify SSNs -to prove they are entitled to work in the usa. how is this legal when asking someone for the same information when suspected of a crime is supposedly forbidden?

      Good question with a very simple answer. Asking a prospective employee for documentation papers is legal because the federal government has enacted a statute making the hiring of an illegal alien a crime. Remember that states can enforce federal law. But the state cannot go beyond the scope of the federal law. Only the federal government can determine the legal status of a non-citizen. Thus, the state cannot enact a law that requires state actors to determine the legal status of the non-citizens they arrest or detain. If the feds refuse to cooperate with that, there is literally nothing the state can do about it. Our problem — as it has been from the beginning — is the federal government’s refusal to enforce the immigration laws on the books. The solution to that is a political one. Vote the creeps out and elect a Congress and President who will enforce the federal laws. We have that opportunity in November and I hope we take advantage of the opportunity in a big way. The best part of this Court’s order is that politically it will backfire on the liberals more than they can even imagine. The problem is in D.C., not Phoenix.

  12. Chris says:

    One night long ago, I was walking out of a grocery store, toward home. I didn’t drive, so I suppose it looked odd for a dumb 22 year old white kid to be walking across a parking lot. An officer confronted me and he asked me for ID. I couldn’t cry teh racisms.. ageisms maybe? or.. I dunno.

    • aardvark says:

      Did you need professional counseling to get over it? Or is the chat room adequate therapy? Nude talk therapy could work – that’s it, we’re therapy! Can we deduct TAM membership as a medical expense? Are there deductions anymore with ObamaDeathCare? Oh well, here we are, nekkid in chat…ready to help any and all who need us. 🙂

You must be logged in to post a comment.