06-28-2010, 12:22 PM
|
#561
|
Timed Out
How Do You Identify?: Permanently Banned 10/24/2010
Preferred Pronoun?: She.
Relationship Status: Married (one of 18,000)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Atascadero, CA
Posts: 4,933
Thanks: 2,309
Thanked 7,108 Times in 2,327 Posts
Rep Power: 0
|
votes to look out for in regards to AZ
Supreme Court to review Arizona law
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is
entering the nation's charged debate over
immigration, agreeing to hear a challenge
from business and civil liberties groups to
an Arizona law that cracks down on
employers who hire undocumented workers.
The justices on Monday accepted an appeal
from the Chamber of Commerce, American
Civil Liberties Union and others to a lower
court ruling that upheld Arizona's law. The
measure requires employers to verify the
eligibility of prospective employees through
a federal database called E-Verify and
imposes sanctions on companies that
knowingly hire undocumented workers.
Then-Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano signed
the measure into law in 2007. Napolitano
now is Homeland Security secretary.
The law is separate from the recently
adopted Arizona immigration law that is
intended to drive illegal immigrants out of
Arizona and also is being challenged as
unconstitutional.
In the case under high court review, the
chamber and ACLU argued that Arizona and
other states that have imposed similar laws
are overstepping their authority. Only
Congress, they said, may legislate about
immigration.
The Obama administration weighed in last
month on the side of the chamber and ACLU,
also arguing that federal immigration law
trumps state efforts.
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld the law.
The federal law that created the E-Verify
system in 1996 made it voluntary and
sought to balance efforts to discourage
illegal immigration with concerns about
discrimination against all immigrants.
Argument will take place in the court term
that begins in October.
The case is Chamber of Commerce v.
Candelaria, 09-115.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...sanctions.html
|
|
|