Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
6Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
FRIENDLY HOUSE, et al. v WHITING, et al. (AZ Immigration) - 424 - NOTICE OF ORDER - azd-02506097731

FRIENDLY HOUSE, et al. v WHITING, et al. (AZ Immigration) - 424 - NOTICE OF ORDER - azd-02506097731

Ratings: (0)|Views: 182|Likes:
Published by Jack Ryan
07/28/2010 424[RECAP] NOTICE OF ORDER in CV10-1413-PHX-SRB. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 07/28/10. (note: see attached pdf for complete details)(ESL) (Entered: 07/28/2010)
07/28/2010 424[RECAP] NOTICE OF ORDER in CV10-1413-PHX-SRB. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 07/28/10. (note: see attached pdf for complete details)(ESL) (Entered: 07/28/2010)

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Jack Ryan on Jul 28, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/25/2012

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONAFriendly House, et al.Plaintiffs,vs.Michael B. Whiting, et al.Defendants.))))))))))))No. CV10-1061-PHX-SRB
NOTICE
 
OF ORDER INCV10-1413-PHX-SRB
Attached to this notice is a copy of the order issued this date in
United States of  America v. State of Arizona, et al.
, CV10-1413-PHX-SRB, on Plaintiff’s Motion forPreliminary Injunction.DATED this 28
th
day of July, 2010.
Case 2:10-cv-01061-SRB Document 424 Filed 07/28/10 Page 1 of 37
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
1
In this Order, unless otherwise specified, the Court refers to S.B. 1070 and H.B. 2162collectively as “S.B. 1070,” describing the April 23, 2010, enactment as modified by theApril 30, 2010, amendments.IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONAUnited States of America,Plaintiff,vs.State of Arizona; and Janice K. Brewer,Governor of the State of Arizona, in herOfficial Capacity,Defendants.)))))))))))))No. CV 10-1413-PHX-SRB
ORDER
At issue is the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Plaintiff the United States(“Pl.’s Mot.”) (Doc. 27).
I.SUMMARY
Against a backdrop of rampant illegal immigration, escalating drug and humantrafficking crimes, and serious public safety concerns, the Arizona Legislature enacted a setof statutes and statutory amendments in the form of Senate Bill 1070, the “Support Our LawEnforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act,” 2010 Arizona Session Laws, Chapter 113, whichGovernor Janice K. Brewer signed into law on April 23, 2010. Seven days later, theGovernor signed into law a set of amendments to Senate Bill 1070 under House Bill 2162,2010 Arizona Session Laws, Chapter 211.
1
Among other things, S.B. 1070 requires officers
Case 2:10-cv-01061-SRB Document 424 Filed 07/28/10 Page 2 of 37
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728- 2 -to check a person’s immigration status under certain circumstances (Section 2) andauthorizes officers to make a warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause tobelieve that the person committed a public offense that makes the person removable from theUnited States (Section 6). S.B. 1070 also creates or amends crimes for the failure of an aliento apply for or carry registration papers (Section 3), the smuggling of human beings (Section4), the performance of work by unauthorized aliens, and the transport or harboring of unlawfully present aliens (Section 5).On July 6, 2010, the United States filed a Complaint with this Court challenging theconstitutionality of S.B. 1070, and it also filed a Motion requesting that the Court issue apreliminary injunction to enjoin Arizona from enforcing S.B. 1070 until the Court can makea final determination as to its constitutionality. The United States argues principally that thepower to regulate immigration is vested exclusively in the federal government, and that theprovisions of S.B. 1070 are therefore preempted by federal law.The Court notes that S.B. 1070 is not a freestanding statute; rather, it is an enactmentof the Arizona Legislature that adds some new sections to the Arizona Revised Statutes(“A.R.S.”) and amends some preexisting sections. S.B. 1070 also contains a severabilityclause, providing that,[i]f a provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance isheld invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application,and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.S.B. 1070 § 12(A). Therefore, the Court cannot and will not enjoin S.B. 1070 in its entirety,as certain parties to lawsuits challenging the enactment have requested. The Court isobligated to consider S.B. 1070 on a section by section and provision by provision basis.Other than seeking a preliminary injunction as to “S.B. 1070,” the United States hasnot made any argument to preliminarily enjoin and the Court therefore does
not 
enjoin thefollowing provisions of S.B. 1070:Section 1 of S.B. 1070no A.R.S. citation:providing the intent of the legislation
Case 2:10-cv-01061-SRB Document 424 Filed 07/28/10 Page 3 of 37

Activity (6)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
lakotaidaho liked this
Rebecca Sherman liked this
silverbull8 liked this
Jack Ryan liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->