Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> ACLU Newsroom
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Legal News
: ACLU NewsroomACLU And Civil Rights Groups Ask Court To Block Implementation Of Arizona's Racial Profiling Law During Legal Battle
By ACLU
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media@aclu.org
PHOENIX – The American Civil Liberties Union and a coalition of civil rights groups asked a federal court late Friday to block Arizona from implementing its controversial new law, known as SB 1070, pending a final court ruling on its constitutionality. The law requires police to demand "papers" from people they stop who they suspect are "unlawfully present" in the U.S. According to the coalition, the law would subject massive numbers of people – both citizens and non-citizens – to racial profiling, improper investigations and detention.
The civil rights coalition includes the ACLU, MALDEF, National Immigration Law Center (NILC), Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC) – a member of the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice, ACLU of Arizona, National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The law firm of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP is acting as co-counsel in the case.
Last month the coalition filed a lawsuit challenging the extreme law and charging that it invites the racial profiling of people of color, violates the First Amendment and interferes with federal law. Friday's filing seeks to halt implementation of the law while the case is litigated. The coalition expects that the court will rule on its request before SB 1070's effective date, July 29, 2010.
The following quotes can be attributed to members of the coalition, as listed below.
Omar Jadwat, staff attorney with the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project:
"SB 1070 is a disastrous law that would endanger public safety, increase racial profiling and create an un-American 'show me your papers' regime if allowed to go into effect. Every day this law would be in effect would be a day too long, and we're confident that the court will understand the importance of preventing its implementation, even while our lawsuit is pending."
Nina Perales, MALDEF Southwest Regional Counsel:
"SB 1070 is an unacceptable and short-sighted attempt to take over the federal immigration system within Arizona's borders. Instead of helping to fix our fundamentally broken immigration system, SB 1070 will decrease the safety and security of all Arizonans by draining the resources of state, local and federal law enforcement."
Karen Tumlin, managing attorney with the National Immigration Law Center:
"Arizona's thinly veiled attempt to institutionalize discrimination puts a target on the back of every immigrant and person of color within their borders. We cannot allow the basic rights and liberties of these members of our society to be undermined simply because an unconstitutional law is now on Arizona's books."
Julie Su, Litigation Director of the Asian Pacific American Legal Center:
"We seek a preliminary injunction to head off numerous harms that are imminent if SB 1070 goes into effect. As law enforcement officials from around the country, including Arizona, have stated, SB 1070 will lead to racial profiling of communities of color and unwarranted, prolonged detention of individuals. This will strain law enforcement resources in a way that compromises public safety for all."
Pablo Alvarado, Executive Director of National Day Laborer Organizing Network:
"Arizona can't pick and choose which portions of the United States Constitution to uphold. Federal law is very clear: Arizona can't subordinate the rights of Mexican-Americans or those with Latino appearance and it certainly cannot rewrite federal immigration laws. Throughout history, when states have gone rogue and when they have unjustly and unlawfully scapegoated their residents, the court has had to intervene to be the ultimate defender of bedrock constitutional protections."
Alessandra Soler Meetze, Executive Director of the ACLU of Arizona:
"Latino communities and families in Maricopa County are already terrorized by the abusive and discriminatory practices of Sheriff Arpaio, who has blatantly used racial profiling to target them in his so-called 'crime suppression' sweeps. With SB 1070, the state is seeking to mandate such unconstitutional practices by all local law enforcement agencies throughout the state, and immediate court intervention is necessary to prevent that from occurring."
Benjamin Todd Jealous, President and Chief Executive Officer of the NAACP:
"African-Americans know all too well the insidious effects of racial profiling. As a nation we should ensure equality for all rather than require police to investigate and detain people based on color and accent. Laws that encourage discrimination have no place in this country anywhere for anyone. SB 1070 has no place on the books, not now or ever."
Organizations and attorneys on the case, Friendly House et al. v. Halliday et al., include:
- ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project: Jadwat, Lucas Guttentag, Cecillia Wang, Tanaz Moghadam and Harini P. Raghupathi;
- MALDEF: Thomas A. Saenz, Perales, Cynthia Valenzuela Dixon, Victor Viramontes, Gladys Limón, Nicholás Espiritu and Ivan Espinoza-Madrigal;
- NILC: Tumlin, Linton Joaquin, Nora A. Preciado, Melissa S. Keaney, Vivek Mittal and Ghazal Tajmiri;
- ACLU Foundation of Arizona: Dan Pochoda and Annie Lai;
- APALC: Su, Ronald Lee, Yungsuhn Park, Connie Choi and Carmina Ocampo
- NDLON: Chris Newman;
- NAACP: Laura Blackburne;
- Munger Tolles & Olson LLP: Bradley S. Phillips, Paul J. Watford, Joseph J. Ybarra, Susan T. Boyd, Yuval Miller, Elisabeth J. Neubauer and Benjamin Maro;
- Roush, McCracken, Guerrero, Miller & Ortega: Daniel R. Ortega, Jr.
The proposed brief in support of a preliminary injunction, can be found at:
www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/friendly-house-et-al-v-halliday-et-al-proposed-brief-support-prelim
The motion for leave to file the brief can be found at:
www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/friendly-house-et-al-v-halliday-et-al-motion-leave-file-motion-prel
More information about the Arizona law, including an ACLU video and slide show, can be found at:
www.aclu.org/what-happens-arizona-stops-arizona
Full post as published by ACLU Newsroom on June 05, 2010 (boomark / email).
Discrimination
Federal laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, or disability
Heart of Atlanta v United States
Supreme Court Decision: Civil Rights Act Protected by Interstate Commerce Clause
H&R Block Retirement Plan Fraud
How to Join Class Action Suit
The Civil Rights Act of 1871
Law bans discrimination enacted under color of state law
Pre-paid Leagal Services
What are Prepaid Legal Benefit Plans
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Civil / Human Rights
alleging violations of basic human and civil rights.
Health Plan Boycott
Connecticut chiropractic groups to pay $87,000 fine in civil suit.
Rally Rights
Gettysburg Borough awards arrested protester $22,500 civil rights settlement.
Becker County
Faces Civil Rights Class Action by Inmates and their Attorneys
Free Speech
Canterbury agrees to pay $60,000 settlement in civil rights lawsuit.
Owasso, OK
$300,000 settlement reached in civil rights violations lawsuit.

Rights groups file suit against Arizona law
RIGHTS GROUPS FILE CLASS ACTION CHALLENGING ARIZONA LAW
Immigration law base for class action suit
Suns, Spurs and NBA Oppose Arizona Racial Profiling Law
Arizona's immigration law may spur a showdown
What Happens in Arizona, Stops in Arizona








