Skip to main content
Visita el canal de noticias en HuffPost Voces
Categorías: Latino News

Utah Immigration Law Blocked; Similarities to Arizona's SB 1070 Cited

Published: 11/5/11 a las 9:30AM
Print Text Size
By Fox News Latino
Utah immigration law
Utah introduced its new immigration law on Tuesday – and it lasted all of 14 hours.

That's all time a federal judge needed to block the law, which would have allowed police to check the citizenship of anyone arrested.

U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups, who made his decision in Salt Lake City, cited concerns about the law's similarities to Arizona's controversial SB 1070.

Arizona's law is in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court.

In his ruling, Waddoups said there is sufficient evidence that at least some portions of the law will be found unconstitutional.

The American Civil Liberties Union and National Immigration Law Center last week sued to stop the implementation of House Bill 497, saying it could lead to racial profiling. The civil rights groups submitted hundreds of pages of evidence and affidavits to prove their claims ahead of a hearing Tuesday.

Utah Assistant Attorney General Jerrold Jensen said the ruling was "not a surprise." Jensen said after the hearing that the law is "fully constitutional" and that his office plans to "argue it vigorously."

Utah's law is significantly different from Arizona's because it doesn't allow police to check the status of every person they encounter, Jensen said in court.

"They want to try the Arizona law, and they make allegations against Utah that may well have applied to Arizona," Jensen said. "But just because the Arizona law is unconstitutional doesn't mean the Utah law is unconstitutional."

The next hearing on is set for July 14.

Waddoups could then decide whether to allow the law to go into effect or overturn it because of constitutional issues. If he overturned it, the measure's fate could depend on the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion on the Arizona law.

On Monday, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced a plan to ask the nation's high court to overturn a ruling that keeps her state's immigration enforcement law on hold.

The federal government argued the law intrudes on its exclusive authority to regulate immigration, disrupts relations between the U.S. and Mexico, hinders cooperation between state and federal officials, and burdens legal immigrants.

The state must file its appeal by July 11. The Supreme Court has discretion on whether to hear the case.

"It seems like this is a big enough national issue that it will ultimately be determined by the United States Supreme Court," Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne said Monday.

The Utah law, signed by Republican Gov. Gary Herbert in March, would require police to check the citizenship status of anyone arrested on suspicion of a felony or class-A misdemeanor, while giving officers discretion to check the citizenship of those stopped for traffic infractions and other lesser offenses.

Class A misdemeanors include theft, negligent homicide and criminal mischief, while felonies range from aggravated burglary to rape and murder.

In a statement after the ruling, Herbert said he has told law enforcement officials the law is on hold but was confident the state would prevail.

"Utah's Attorney General and state Legislature worked hard to craft a bill that would withstand constitutional scrutiny," Herbert said in a statement after the ruling. "Utah will have ample opportunity in court to demonstrate this bill is on solid footing."

ACLU managing attorney Cecillia Wang said the law is potentially worse than the Arizona law because anyone stopped by police could be required to prove their citizenship status. Making it optional for lesser offenses makes racial profiling even more likely, she said.

"This violates the Constitutional right of every American," Wang said. "The times where officers have discretion are the vast number of times that people encounter police."

Police chiefs and county sheriffs have said very little will change in their handling of immigration laws. That was true Tuesday - for 14 hours, at least - when no arrests were made based on the new law.

There has also been very little public outcry about the law, and no protests or rallies were reported Tuesday.

That is due in large part to the generally positive response from the public to the bipartisan immigration overhaul passed by the Legislature in March, said National Immigration Law Center managing attorney Karen Tumlin.

The package of reforms is based on compassion in immigration laws, and includes a guest worker program starting in 2013 to allow illegal immigrants to remain, live and work in the state, winning support from some liberal immigration advocates but has been criticized by opponents as an amnesty program.

Based on reporting by The Associated Press.
2010 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved

Articulos Relacionados

226 comentarios Comenta aqui

jimmy d

9:47AM 5-13-2011

Why is the artical writtin in English, but the commentary section is in Spanish?
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (0)

Sekinu2

2:28PM 5-11-2011

Thats ridiculous. the police have every right and should be checking residence status since appearently the feds and Obama will not enforce the law so he can try to gain illegal votes for next election. How an illegal alien has a drivers license is beyond me and to handcuff law officials from upholding the law this judge should be removed immediately as a a criminal who is aiding and abiding criminals. It is time the people take back America and we have laws for a reason. If your upset your being validated as a legal citizen then your probably an illegal criminal as its a simple 2 minute check thats no big deal unless your breaking the law. Obama and the dems must go.Vote Herman Cain in 2012
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (357)

Caitlin

3:45PM 5-11-2011

@UH34D
How is verifying your citizenship unconstitutional? If you're here illegally then you have NO constitutional rights because the constitution is for the American people only, not the whole world. Illegals are not protected under the constitution. Where in the Constitution does it say that it's reach extends beyond the U.S.? IT DOESNT!!!!
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (306)

American Citizen

7:45PM 5-13-2011

I may be mistaken but if you come into the USA legally I have no problem with that. But for all the illegals that break our laws to come here and rape our land and economy...........well this is a good law. If you want to work and live here then do it legally! Enter with a Visa and do not over stay it! And what right do illegals have under our constitution? This is just another farce were the federal government is giving away the United States.
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (0)

fanblade

11:08PM 5-11-2011

brainslug,It is about less goverment.With borders closed the amount of government needed and money spent on illegals would result in smaller government and money saved.These people will never pay there own way much less contribute.
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (169)

w weiner

1:06PM 5-13-2011

Does this mean that the police couldn't check to see if the 9-11 terroists were from another country?
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (0)

jo

8:10PM 5-11-2011


brainslug

5:29PM 5-11-2011

I thought you teabaggers were all about LESS government . . . come back when you can define your own terms, quit wasting our time when clearly, you don't even have a real PLAN, just a theory and a useless political ideology..............................................................
We are for less government that interferes with every aspect of our lives.....we are for a government that makes OUR security, OUR best interests number one priority.............NOT illegal aliens, or any other special interest group or (voting block the dems are trying to hoodwink)
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (45)

Lane

8:42PM 5-11-2011

When does it become constitutional to break the law? Perhaps everyone by constitutional law should be allowed to speed, DWI, rape, rob, murder and any other crime committed without penalty. Just braek the law and live off the land is my motto.
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (71)

John

10:03PM 5-11-2011

Is this correct that the comments section is in Spanish? What is so difficult of seeing what is going on to the end of America? Next time a policeman stops me I am going to learn enough spanish to not allwo him to arrest me for a crime. In the court will cite these cases...

  • Califica este comantario:
  • (23)

Joyce

8:54AM 5-12-2011

When I traveled in Mexico I was STOPPED 3 times and had to show my visa.
They can racial profile but we can't????? WTF
  • Califica este comantario:
  • (18)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Proximo>>

¿Tienes algo que decir?

El discurso civil es esencial en el desarrollo del conocimiento personal y es fundamental para el desarrollo del consenso comunal. Nos complace poder ofrecer esta plataforma a los usuarios de AOL Latino para ustedes aprovechar y encaminar una conversación relevante e importante.

Pero hay que observar las reglas:
  • No se permiten ataques personales, insultos, amenazas, groserías, albures, frases en doble sentido, lenguaje vulgar o con mala intención hacia el foro o alguno de sus usuarios
  • Cualquier tipo de publicidad está estrictamente prohibida
  • Cualquier mensaje que infrinja las reglas será eliminado sin previo aviso
  • La reincidencia podría llevar al responsable a perder el privilegio de publicar comentarios

PUBLICIDAD