Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

babylonsister

(171,064 posts)
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 08:11 AM Apr 2012

Next at the Supreme Court: A Deeply Cruel Policy Comes Before the Justices

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/102898/arizona-immigration-sb1070-supreme-court

Next at the Supreme Court: A Deeply Cruel Policy Comes Before the Justices

Nathan Pippenger
April 24, 2012 | 12:00 am


When Governor Jan Brewer signed S.B. 1070—Arizona’s notorious immigration law—in 2010, she didn’t just enact what was, at the time, the harshest immigration regime in the United States; she also inspired copycat bills in a number of other states. But with the Supreme Court set to consider the constitutionality of Arizona’s law—oral arguments for Arizona v. United States will be heard on Wednesday, and the Court’s decision is expected by the end of June—there’s a lot more at stake than the fate of S.B. 1070 and its imitators. What hangs in the balance is an unprecedentedly harsh, but increasingly popular, philosophy of combating illegal immigration.

snip//

Whatever the Court’s determination, it will have effects beyond Arizona. “If the Court were to bless Arizona’s law,” says Fitz, “it would effectively enable the states that have their comparable provisions on hold to go forward.” That means, at the very least, that Georgia, South Carolina, Indiana, and Utah will likely proceed with their laws. (Alabama’s law goes beyond Arizona’s in some respects, so even if the Court blesses S.B. 1070, it could still face some roadblocks.) Chishti agrees, and adds that sanction by the Court could give states that have flirted with similar laws “clear leeway.”

A ruling in favor of Arizona would have cultural and social consequences as well, say opponents: It would essentially bless racial- and ethnic-profiling, and create profound inconsistencies in policies between different states. “On an important issue like immigration, where we’re supposed to speak with one voice, you’ll have a cacophony of voices,” Chishti warns. The split between welcoming and unwelcoming states could become even starker. Besides the states whose existing laws will likely move forward, the list of additional imitators, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress as well as my reporting, could eventually include Virginia, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Kentucky, North Carolina, Florida, Oklahoma, and Mississippi.

On the other hand, of course, the Court could strike down S.B. 1070, which might cool some of the enthusiasm for similar laws in state legislatures across the country. Though, with another election this fall and anti-immigration sentiment still a potent force, it’s unlikely we’ve seen the end of heavy-handed attempts at “self-deportation.”
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Next at the Supreme Court...