A Plain English Document Translation Company

Definition for each icon you may see in your document

Action

Alert! Unclear. Bring this specific section to the attention of your attorney or document author for clarification

Clear. No further clerical assistance needed.

Plain English applied here.

This legend defines symbols found throughout your plain English document.

DISCLAIMER
By accepting this document, you’re stating you understand UnlockDocs is strictly a clerical service, and does not provide a legal interpretation of your document. This Plain English Guide in no way supersedes the information in your original document, or replaces the value that only an attorney or document author can provide. You are strongly advised to seek counsel from a professional, whether attorney, licensed agent, or other document author, for further clarification. If any conflicts appear between words or phrases, your original document and attorney or document author prevails, and remains your ultimate authority.

Page 1 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

The US claims the following:

The US wants to declare SB 1070 invalid because it violates the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. [Federal laws and treaties with other countries must go through the federal government, not states.]

Page 2 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

In our constitutional system the federal government is the supreme authority over immigration issues, and has to balance several things: a. national laws b. enforcement c. foreign relations d. humanitarian interests

Congress has assigned enforcement of immigration laws to federal agencies and three executive offices: a. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) b. Department of Justice (DOJ) c. Department of State

States can only exercise police power when dealing indirectly with minor immigration issues. States aren’t allowed to set their own immigration policies or interfere with federal immigration laws and policies. The Constitution prohibits patchwork immigration policies across states and local authorities.

Page 3 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Despite this, Arizona recently passed SB 1070, a bill meant to prevent illegal aliens from entering and staying in the state. SB 1070 gives all state and local government agencies in Arizona the authority to enforce this new law. It states that police have a duty to determine immigration status whenever there is “reasonable suspicion.” It applies criminal penalties to those who are here illegally. It also gives legal residents of Arizona the right to sue for damages if any official or agency fails to enforce SB 1070 to the fullest extent permitted by federal law.

Page 4 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SB 1070 pursues only one goal – “attrition” [reducing] – and ignores many other objectives that Congress has established. In doing this, the bill interrupts the federal government’s priority, which is to capture aliens who pose a threat to national security or public safety. This state law conflicts and undermines federal efforts. For example, it will: 1. Drain federal resources and agencies that are meant to target dangerous aliens on a national level 2. Detain and harass authorized visitors, immigrants and citizens who don’t have, or carry, the identification required by the statute 3. Sweep many into the enforcement of the bill that are not meant to be included 4. Conflict with federal laws regarding registration, smuggling, and employment of aliens 5. Ignore federal humanitarian efforts to protect victims, or help those here as a result of natural disasters 6. Interfere with US foreign policy and national security regarding Mexico and other countries

The US understands Arizona’s legitimate concerns, and has focused efforts on our borders. The federal government is open to cooperative efforts. But the US Constitution forbids Arizona to interfere by setting up its own state-specific policy. Therefore, SB 1070 is invalid and must be struck down. Page 5 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

JURISDICTION AND VENUE Because this falls under the US Constitution and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), this is the appropriate court to hear this case. Most of the events happened in Arizona, so the District of Arizona is the appropriate venue. Also, the defendants are the Governor of Arizona, and the State of Arizona.

PARTIES PLAINTIFF: USA DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ) DEPARTMENT OF STATE

DHS is responsible for: 1. Administration and enforcement of immigration laws 2. Investigation of crime Page 6 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER* 3. Protection of our borders against illegal entry 4. Providing citizenship 5. Immigration services

Action

DOJ is managed by the Attorney General, who shares immigration-related responsibilities with DHS, and can order deportation.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE is partially responsible for administration of federal immigration laws, including visas.

DEFENDANT:

STATE OF ARIZONA JAN BREWER, as GOVERNOR OF ARIZONA

Page 7 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

STATEMENT OF THE CLAIM Federal Authority and Law Governing Immigration and Status of Aliens The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution demands federal laws to be the supreme authority of the US, despite anything in a state constitution.

The Constitution gives the federal government the power to establish immigration laws and to regulate business with other countries. The federal government also controls immigration requirements, and regulates immigration status. The Constitution gives the President the authority to oversee the execution of laws, and broad authority over foreign affairs.

Congress enforces immigration laws through provisions found in the INA, by determining: 1. Who is eligible to enter and live in the US 2. Who will be deported 3. Consequences for coming here illegally Page 8 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

4. 5. 6. 7.

Penalties Conditions to be met in order to live here Alien employment Process for citizenship

According to the INA, the executive branch of the US has the power to enforce federal immigration laws, and federal agencies decide what remedies are appropriate in each case.

The federal government places a priority on dangerous aliens. This includes:

1. Terrorists 2. Spies 3. Criminals, such as those involved in; a. violence b. felonies c. repeat offenses 4. Certain gang members 5. Those with outstanding warrants 6. Fugitives with criminal records

Page 9 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Congress has to take several things into account when creating federal immigration laws and policy, such as a variety of competing national interests. Preventing illegal aliens from entering and living in the US is very important, but not the only goal. Our laws also consider unique national interests, including: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Trade Visitors that come here legally Fair and equal treatment of legal residents Humanitarian treatment Ensuring treatment of individuals doesn’t harm foreign relations or treatment of US citizens abroad

Because immigration control demands flexibility in congressional policy, Congress gives the President and federal agencies a lot of discretion to balance these interests.

Page 10 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

The DHS and DOJ oversee most of the US immigration interests, and have the power to enforce the INA. The Department of State also has the power to administer immigration laws, including visa programs, according to the INA. The DHS can order prosecution and deportation.

The DOJ can deport an alien for things such as staying after a permit expires, or committing a crime. The DHS and DOJ can charge civil and criminal penalties for immigration violations. On the other hand, if it helps with some other immigration goal, they have the authority to: 1. Forego sanctions 2. Allow an alien to leave voluntarily, and at his or her expense 3. Choose not to deport

Page 11 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Federal law allows an illegal alien to be here under certain conditions, such as; 1. Safety from race, religion, nationality, social, or political persecution 2. Natural disaster 3. War 4. Humanitarian issues 5. Family unity 6. Other extraordinary situations

With this in mind, DHS and DOJ use discretion when considering whether to deport, charge penalties, or protect aliens. These decisions are based on policies made by Congress and balanced by the executive branch, not just the status of our resources.

Page 12 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Congress, which holds the exclusive authority for determining who stays or goes, has decided merely being found here illegally isn’t enough to detain someone, or press criminal charges. [As
stated above, the US makes allowances for asylum, fleeing from domestic violence, persecution, refugees, etc. There are also times when someone may arrive legally but become “illegal” due to civil circumstances, health issues, etc.]

Rather, it becomes a part of a criminal offense when an alien is here after deportation. Illegal entry, however, is a criminal offense.

Congress specifically gives federal immigration officers the authority to: 1. Patrol the US border 2. Search vehicles and land near the border 3. Prevent illegal aliens from entering 4. Arrest illegal aliens when it’s likely they will escape before a warrant can be obtained

Page 13 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Congress has created an alien registration system for monitoring those who enter the US. This system requires aliens to register with the Department of State when applying for visas. Any alien, 14 years old or older, who is here for 30 days or more and hasn’t complied, must register and be fingerprinted by the DHS. If not they can be imprisoned for up to 6 months. Aliens are also required to report any change of address to the DHS within 10 days.

Congress designed the registration forms, determined what exceptions can be made, and the confidential nature of the information. Aliens 18 years of age or older are required to carry their alien registration document or card. The INA stresses that anyone who fails to comply can be fined and imprisoned for up to 30 days.

Page 14 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

There are several reasons when an alien won’t be given registration papers, such as: 1. Safety from persecution 2. As victims of human trafficking 3. As victims of violent crime While an application under these exceptions is pending, the alien may not have papers and is certainly not going to be prosecuted.

These humanitarian programs demonstrate federal policy to assist and welcome such victims to the US. It would violate federal policy to prosecute or detain these aliens simply based on immigration status – which is often known to the federal government, but for certain reasons doesn’t amount to deportation.

Page 15 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER* Congress has already made smuggling illegal aliens into the country, and transporting them within US borders, a criminal offense. A person will be criminally charged for “knowingly” transporting an illegal alien.

Action

However, the criminal charges are directed at the smuggler, not illegal aliens using transportation for secondary purposes. Congress chooses not to penalize an illegal alien simply for moving within the country or across state lines unless other factors are present. The same goes for those providing a ride in this limited capacity.

Federal laws apply to those who intentionally hide, harbor, or shield an illegal alien from detection, or encourage others to enter the US illegally. Federal law does not, however, limit the movement of either illegal or legal aliens between states. Federal law also exempts religious groups who invite foreigners here to do missionary work or for ministry reasons, and give them basic living expenses.

Page 16 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Congress prohibits illegal alien employment. Federal laws also make it illegal to allow an alien to continue working if you later discover he or she is illegal, or has become illegal.

Congress applies civil penalties for immigration document fraud to both employers and aliens. Congress chooses not to apply criminal penalties to illegal aliens trying to find work in the US, but they can be deported.

DHS enforces immigration laws through: 1. 2. 3. 4. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) State and local agencies Page 17 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Congress provides a number of ways for a state to assist federal government in enforcing immigration laws. For example:

1. When a mass of aliens create an emergency that requires an immediate Federal response. 2. When the DHS gives appropriately trained and supervised state and local officers the authority to help with investigating, arrest, and detention of aliens 3. When state and local law officers are needed to arrest aliens previously deported after being convicted of a felony

DHS uses a variety of programs through states and local governments to enforce federal immigration laws, such as. 1. Law Enforcement Agency Response Program (LEAR). This is Arizona-specific program that responds to calls from state and local policeman who need help from ICE with suspected illegal aliens, 24/7. 2. Law Enforcement Support Center (LESC). Administered and operated by the ICE, this program provides immigration status and identity information to local, state and federal law enforcement regarding aliens involved in criminal activity, 24/7. 3. ICE and CBP officers assist with translation, determine alien status, and evaluate documentation. Page 18 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Although federal law gives state and local officials an opportunity to participate, it doesn’t mean states can enact their own immigration policies to compete with national policy. Forming immigration policy and balancing enforcement priorities is strictly reserved for the federal government. It doesn’t fall within the state’s police powers.

ARIZONA’S SB 1070 APRIL 23, 2010: Governor Brewer passed SB 1070 to prevent aliens from entering or living in Arizona illegally by using state and local law enforcement. It requires police officers to arrest individuals if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that they’re illegal immigrants. It also allows any legal resident of Arizona to sue for damages if an official or agency adopts policies that don’t prosecute to the full extent of federal law.

Page 19 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SB 1070 imposes criminal penalties: 1. If an alien fails to register or carry documentation

2. For so-called smuggling, transporting, or harboring an illegal alien 3. For encouraging an illegal alien to move to Arizona 4. For illegal aliens who seek work Also, local and state police officers have the authority to make arrests without warrants if they think an alien did something that rises to the level of deportation, even if the suspected act didn’t happen in Arizona.

At the same time, Brewer issued an executive order requiring police officers to take training in what defines “reasonable suspicion,” and to stress that race, color or national origin alone, can’t be part of that definition.

Page 20 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

One week later, Brewer amended the bill with the newer HB 2162 in response to those who expressed concern that it would lead to racial profiling.

SB 1070 tries to second guess federal policies and shuffle federal priorities, even though states have no say in federal domains.

Arizona’s SB 1070: 1. Disrupts the INA national enforcement system 2. Interferes with US foreign affairs priorities, and ignores humanitarian and security objectives 3. Harms a variety of US interests

SB 1070 tries to set state-specific immigration policy in an area constitutionally controlled by the federal government exclusively.

It conflicts with federal immigration law and policy. It conflicts with foreign policy. It impedes the objectives of Congress, and so it is prevented.

Page 21 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SB 1070 creates new state immigration crimes regarding employment, transportation, and presence. It increases the chance an alien will be imprisoned by requiring legal status verification while allowing Arizona police to arrest them for these type of crimes, even if the crime has no connection with Arizona.

SB 1070 ignores all other objectives in the federal immigration system, including the priority to remove dangerous aliens. Congress demands that our federal immigration policy consider many things: immigration control, national security issues, as well as humanitarian concerns and foreign relations. Arizona created state crimes for unlawful presence, even though these acts are not criminal acts according to Congress. SB 1070 interferes with federal policy and enforcement of US immigration laws.

Page 22 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SB 1070 conflicts with federal government objectives, and has already created problems for US diplomacy with countries such as Mexico. SB 1070 impacts national security, drug enforcement, tourism, trade and a variety of other issues. As a result of Mexican President Calderon’s Address to Joint Meeting of Congress on May 20, 2010, the US has been criticized by other countries and international organizations. This has created a breakdown in border security and disaster management. SB 1070 undermines US foreign policy related to immigration issues and other national concerns.

Other states are considering similar legislation. This would result in further significant damage to: 1. US foreign relations 2. US ability to fairly enforce federal immigration law and humanitarian efforts 3. The discretion of the executive branch to make decisions as provided through the INA, which would result in inconsistent treatment of aliens across the US Page 23 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SECTION 2 Section 2 of SB 1070 requires officers to make a reasonable attempt to determine someone’s legal status and verify with the federal government. It also requires any person arrested to have their status verified before being released.

This section lets legal residents file a civil action to challenge any agency that adopts a policy that limits enforcement. The fact is, Arizona police, like federal, have always had the option to verify immigration status during a lawful stop. Now, the threat of private lawsuits and the required status check, make verification and prosecution mandatory.

Page 24 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

So the mandatory verification combined with new state criminal penalties, forces officers to maximize their scrutiny of a person’s legal status. This will effect those that the federal government has already reviewed and chosen not to penalize.

This will result in countless inspections and detention of people who are here legally. An Arizona officer is required to verify status if he or she has a “reasonable suspicion,” that the person is here illegally. But because “reasonable suspicion,” is not definitive proof, the rule has to apply to everyone – even those who are here legally, as well as US citizens. Further, because federal authorities may not be able to immediately verify each status, and rarely have any information at all related to US citizens, this will result in longer and longer detention of even legal persons.

The burden will be on people who are legal but can’t prove it immediately, such as those who don’t have a driver’s license or underage minors. This will subject legal aliens to the possibility of an inquisition and police shadowing. Congress plainly designed the federal immigration program to prevent this type of problem.

Page 25 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Mandatory state alien inspection will require federal verification. This will burden federal resources and the DHS in the following way: 1. Increase number of requests for verification 2. Direct focus away from priority immigration issues 3. Require federal government to direct resources away from dangerous aliens, putting our national security and public safety at risk This violates the Supremacy Clause.

Section 2 conflicts with the objectives of Congress. It creates a break in the priority order the federal government places on enforcement. Section 2 doesn’t help with any legitimate state interest.

Page 26 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SECTION 3 Section 3 makes it a new state crime for an alien to violate United States Codes that require aliens to carry registration documents at all times. It penalizes those who intentionally fail to apply for registration. The state penalty is: 1. A maximum of $100 2. A sentence of up to 20 days for the first violation 3. A sentence of 30 days for the second violation

Section 3 is preempted by the federal alien registration program, which provides standardized registration in a single integrated system.

Section 3 demands the arrest and prosecution of all aliens who don’t have registration papers. But there are many classes of aliens who aren’t given papers while their federal cases are pending. SB 1070 seeks to criminalize aliens the federal government already knows about. This is a problem for Congress regarding certain forms of humanitarian relief. Page 27 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Section 3 attempts to seek control of the details surrounding an alien’s entry and presence in the US, without serving any state police purpose. The federal government’s exclusive authority over the regulation of immigration, preempts the state of Arizona.

SECTION 4 Section 4 makes it a felony for a person to smuggle human beings for profit or commercial purposes.

Page 28 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Federal smuggling law is a higher authority than Arizona’s smuggling law. The differences between the two are important, and show that Arizona’s law actually regulates the presence of illegal aliens already here, and not smuggling at all. Here is why: 1. Arizona’s law forbids any commercial transportation service from giving a ride to an illegal alien. 2. Arizona’s law charges both the driver/transporter and the illegal alien with a crime. 3. Arizona’s law doesn’t target smuggling across the US international borders.

Arizona’s smuggling law regulates an alien’s life in the US by essentially banning illegal aliens from using commercial transportation. Within certain guidelines, a state can regulate conduct that isn’t regulated by the federal government. However, Arizona’s smuggling law challenges existing federal immigration laws. It also burdens legally registered aliens, because commercial transportation providers will refuse service. Therefore, Arizona’s smuggling law is an obstacle for Congress in creating penalties for illegal entry and presence in the US.

Page 29 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

SECTION 5 This section makes it a crime for an illegal alien in the US to work, or try to get a job, in Arizona.

Arizona’s new state laws regarding employment of aliens, is prevented by federal law. Federal laws penalize the employer: the worker isn’t penalized for humanitarian reasons. Making this a crime in the state of Arizona is an obstacle to the objectives of Congress.

Page 30 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Arizona makes it a new state crime to: 1. Transport someone you know is an illegal alien 2. Hide an alien from authorities 3. Encourage an illegal alien to come to Arizona if you know they’re in the US illegally The Arizona law makes exceptions for certain professions, but ignores religious organizations which invite and assist in bringing an alien to the US as ministers or missionaries. The federal government makes allowances for these aliens.

This new law attempts to stop illegal entry in the US through Arizona. States are specifically barred from this subject, according to the US Constitution The new law also restricts interstate commerce. This is in direct violation with the US Constitution, which assigns management of interstate commerce to the federal government.

Page 31 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER* SECTION 6 This section allows the officer to arrest anyone he or she believes has broken a law worthy of deportation. It doesn’t require the officer to coordinate with DHS to confirm it. It doesn’t require the offense to have taken place in the state of Arizona.

Action

In the past, Arizona law allowed arrests without warrants if someone was suspected of having committed a crime in Arizona. Now, Section 6 also allows arrests if the crime was committed in another state, so long as the officer believes the crime is worthy of deportation. It’s clear the purpose of this section is to provide more opportunities to arrest aliens on the basis of immigration status.

This section: 1. Makes no exception for aliens who have already been cleared by federal authorities. It also ignores the fact that only federal authorities can actually issue deportation. 2. Will result in arrests based on out-of-state crimes, even if the crime and immigration issues have already been resolved. 3. Interferes with federal authority, and will place a burden on legal aliens in a way that conflicts with federal immigration laws. 4. Will result in the arrest of aliens whose out-of-state crimes wouldn’t be worthy of deportation at all. Page 32 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

Because of everything mentioned here, defendants’ actions cause substantial harm to the US. This court action is the only remedy available to the plaintiff.

1ST CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of the Supremacy Clause All paragraphs above are included here. SB 1070 allows Arizona to create its own immigration policy and directly regulate the immigration status of aliens. This conflicts with federal law and foreign policy. It ignores federal policies, interferes with US enforcement priorities, and impedes federal objectives. Sections 1-6 violate the Supremacy Clause, and are invalid.

Page 33 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER* 2nd CAUSE OF ACTION Preemption Under Federal Law All paragraphs above are included here. Sections 1-6 are preempted by federal law and foreign policy.

Action

3rd CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of the Commerce Clause All paragraphs above are included here. Section 5 restricts transportation of aliens in a manner that is prohibited by Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution. [“Congress has the power to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and
among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes…”]

It violates the Commerce Clause so it’s invalid.

Page 34 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

* Federal Lawsuit/US v. STATE OF ARIZONA and JAN BREWER*

Action

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The US asks for the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. Sections 1-6 of SB 1070 be declared invalid, null and void Stop the State of Arizona from enforcing these sections Reimburse the US for its costs in bringing this court action Award any other relief found to be just and proper

END

Page 35 of 35
PEG_US v ARIZONA
Copyright © 2009 UNLOCKDOCS.COM. All rights reserved. Patent Pending

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful