Frustration on all sides with Supreme Court ruling on Arizona immigration law

The United States Supreme Court ruling upholding the most controversial component of the Arizona’s 2010 immigration statute is sending waves through immigrant communities across the country.

One piece of the law requires police officers to verify a person’s immigration status if there is any suspicion the person is in the country unlawfully. That portion — which opponents of the law say promotes racial profiling — was unanimously upheld while three other components were struck down in a 5-3 decision that many are calling an election-year victory for President Barack Obama.

But the mixed ruling left people on both sides of the debate feeling frustrated.

Lawrence Benito, executive director of Chicago-based Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, said the ruling legalizes harassment.

“The Supreme Court ruling today gave the green light for racial profiling against people because of the way they look or speak, even if they’ve been U.S. citizens their entire lives,” Benito said.

Because portions of the law were struck down, it will not be a state-level crime for an undocumented immigrant to seek work in Arizona, officers will not be able to arrest people without a warrant on suspicion they are undocumented, and immigrants will not be required by the state to register with the federal government.

Based on federal law, however, it is illegal to knowingly employ undocumented immigrants, and foreigners are required to participate in a federal registration program.

Rick Biesada, of Lindenhurst, was one of the original Minutemen at the Mexico border in April 2005, returning to Chicago that same month to form the first inland chapter of the anti-illegal immigration group. Biesada said striking down three of the four provisions when they mirrored federal law was “preposterous.”

“The bad part about it was the federal government getting mixed up in states’ rights,” Biesada said. “They’re sticking their nose where it doesn’t belong.”

The fact that the Arizona statute mirrors federal law is precisely why the majority of justices struck down three of its provisions. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that the portions in question were pre-empted by federal law — the state has no right to engage in even complementary activities in the area of immigration, they said.

The Arizona statute was signed into law by Gov. Jan Brewer in 2010, prompting a wave of protests across the country. Supporters of the legislation said it was a way to address immigration in a state with large numbers of undocumented immigrants.

The four provisions the Supreme Court ruled on Monday never took effect because of pending court action. While the three pieces the court struck down cannot be implemented, Arizona police will be able to begin a policy of verifying the immigration status of people they stop.

Rep. Luis Gutierrez, chairman of the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said in a news release Monday the ruling that allows this policy undermines the relationship between police and the communities they serve. But Gutierrez, of Chicago, pointed to President Obama’s June 15 announcement sparing eligible undocumented youths from deportation, saying it would keep this group, at least, from flooding “already overtaxed deportation resources.”

“Affirmatively protecting DREAM-eligible young immigrants from deportation will help mitigate the damage done by state legislators and the Supreme Court,” the release said.

For many groups, the Supreme Court findings will not mark the end of the debate.

The Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights plans to register 26,000 new voters and get almost 160,000 people to the polls for the November election in an effort to fight back against the high court’s ruling through the democratic process.

Twenty sites, about half in Chicago and half in the suburbs, have been identified for the New Americans Democracy Project Fellowship program where fellows, starting this week, will begin a voter registration and information campaign to get details about issues like the Arizona law to the immigrant community.

“We understand we’re now entering the political season,” Benito said. “We want elected officials to know that it’s not just about campaign speeches or promises, it’s about the actions that they take. We’re going to hold both Republicans and Democrats accountable.”