AZ Gov. Jan Brewer holds Obama accountable... And he doesn't like it.

Fellow Patriot,

Yesterday, AZ Gov. Jan Brewer greeted Barack Obama as he deplaned from Air Force One, as governors often do. But unlike other governors, she and the president had what can only be described as an intense encounter on the tarmac.

As Obama stepped off the plane, Gov. Brewer handed the president a “welcome” note to the state, as well as an invitation to talk about a comeback for her state. But Obama wasn’t interested.

Rather, the pro-Amnesty president used the opportunity to snub Gov. Brewer who is known nationwide for her tireless fight to secure America’s southern border. This past fall, she even took on fencing the U.S.-Mexico border since the feds have brushed off OUR demands.


HELP MMPAC FIGHT FOR GOV. BREWER’S ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAW! THE FEDS WON’T BUILD THE FENCE BUT BREWER WILL! HOLD OBAMA ACCOUNTABLE – SELECT HERE!

According to Gov. Brewer, “[Obama] immediately took umbrage,” with her book, ‘Scorpions for Breakfast,’ and was “disgruntled” she wrote that the he was “patronizing” in a one-on-one meeting about border security even though publicly she told the media they had simply agreed to disagree over border security measures.

The White House says the president is willing to meet with her again and looks forward to discussion about improving Arizona’s economy. Whether or not Obama was willing to meet with Brewer again to discuss securing the U.S.-Mexico border was not mentioned by White House officials.

And we’re pretty sure we already know the answer to that one.

Time and time again, the feds have been asked, plead with and begged by U.S. Citizens to secure the fence, and over recent years, Gov. Brewer has been among the bravest – if not the bravest – elected official to stand up to Washington. And now, with Barack Obama’s insult to Brewer, it’s crystal clear that under Washington’s leadership, illegal immigrants will continue destroying our country.


HELP MMPAC FIGHT FOR GOV. BREWER’S ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAW! THE FEDS WON’T BUILD THE FENCE BUT BREWER WILL! HOLD OBAMA ACCOUNTABLE – SELECT HERE!

It’s also crystal clear that we need to show Washington whose side voting American citizens are on… Right now, we need to show our support for this tough-as-nails Governor who is not afraid to look Obama in the eye and challenge him to his face. We need to keep up the fight to secure our borders now and make sure our message is not lost in election year politics.

Reporters who witnessed Wednesday’s exchange say that Brewer was pointing her finger at him at one point and they seemed to also be talking over one another. It also appeared to them that Obama walked away while Brewer was in mid-sentence.

Gov. Brewer said when asked that she wasn’t thrown off by the president bringing up the book (and his wounded ego), but that she thought they probably should have talked about jobs.


HELP MMPAC FIGHT FOR GOV. BREWER’S ANTI-IMMIGRATION LAW! THE FEDS WON’T BUILD THE FENCE BUT BREWER WILL! HOLD OBAMA ACCOUNTABLE – SELECT HERE!

Arizona is leading the way for other states to hold the federal government responsible for upholding its Constitutional duty to secure the border with their next fight against the pro-Amnesty lobbyists taken up by the Supreme Court this spring.

As you’re aware, Gov. Brewer’s state has been taking fire from the Obama administration for its crackdown on illegal immigration – from securing the border to enforcing federal immigration law. Arizona's counterclaim filed with the Supreme Court is based on five fundamental points:

(i) the federal government has failed to gain "operational control of the border," as required by federal law;

(ii) failed to enforce federal immigration law;

(iii) failed to protect Arizona from harms associated with illegal immigration;

(iv) been negligent in reimbursing Arizona for more than $760 million in costs for incarcerating illegal immigrants;

(v) sought to pre-empt the state from protecting the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens.

And we're here to help Arizona every step of the way.

It’s up to you and I to support Arizona’s rise to action against illegal immigration be it in court defending state's rights or physically securing our border with Mexico.

Gov. Brewer – not Obama – is standing up for America against illegal immigration. We need to stand up with her.

For America,

Minuteman PAC

P.S. America’s Border Sheriffs will file their amicus brief, a critical component supporting Arizona’s SB1070 law against illegal immigration, with the Supreme Court on February 2 as they prepare to hear our case this spring. The legal bill to file Arizona’s amicus brief will top $300,000, and they are asking for our support to keep legal costs off the backs of taxpayers. We know times are tough, but please whatever you can afford WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE. Please take a moment right now to contribute $5, $25, $100, or even $250 – whatever you can afford in these tough times – to defending America from illegal immigration and securing our southern border NOW.

Brewer to Countersue Federal Government Over Immigration Enforcement

.

Brewer to Countersue Federal Government Over Immigration Enforcement  

Published February 10, 2011 | FoxNews.com

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced Thursday that her state will file a countersuit against the federal government, claiming Washington has failed to enforce immigration law along the southern border.

The governor said the federal government hasn't secured the state's border with Mexico and has stuck Arizona with the costs tied to illegal immigration.

"Because the federal government has failed to protect the citizens of Arizona, I am left with no other choice," Brewer said.

Brewer went "On the Record" with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Thursday night and said she is "in it to win it."

"We're continually looking at arrests of drug cartels," she said. "It's just untolerable."

"We will fight it all all the way to the Supreme Court," she added."

The announcement is the latest swipe in the ongoing legal dispute between Arizona and the U.S. Department of Justice over the state's tough immigration law. After the Obama administration challenged that law, a judge last year blocked key portions of it from going into effect. While the case is on appeal, Brewer said the countersuit will be filed as part of the federal government's challenge.

"It's outrageous the United States Department of Justice sued the people of Arizona to stop Senate Bill 1070," Brewer said. "Our message for the federal government is very simple -- use federal resources to combat the cartels who are breaking the federal law."

Arizona plans to sue on five different counts, including a claim that the federal government has failed to enforce immigration laws enacted by Congress and a claim it has failed to reimburse the state for costs associated with jailing criminal immigrants.

The original Arizona immigration law was passed following years of complaints that the federal government hadn't done enough to lessen the state's role as the nation's busiest illegal entry point.

A judge blocked the most controversial portions of the law, such as a requirement that says police, while enforcing other laws, must question people's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Manhunt for Suspect in Border Agent Killing

.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/12/15/border-patrol-agent-killed-southern-arizona-416534199/
Published December 16, 2010 | Associated Press

A shootout between border patrol agents and bandits near Arizona's troubled boundary with Mexico  has left one American agent dead and a suspect wounded, a union leader says.

The clash Tuesday night came after agents spotted suspected bandits known for targeting illegal immigrants along a violent smuggling corridor in the Arizona desert, National Border Patrol Council President T.J. Bonner said.

Brian A. Terry, 40, was waiting with three other agents in a remote area north of the border city of Nogales late Tuesday when the gun battle erupted, Bonner said. Terry died in the shooting, but no other agents were injured.

Border Patrol spokesman Eric Cantu and FBI spokeswoman Brenda Lee Nath declined to confirm Bonner's account but said that authorities have four suspects in custody and are searching for a fifth. The Border Patrol declined to reveal the country of origin of the suspects.

The shooting followed months of heated political rhetoric on the immigration issue in Arizona as lawmakers passed a sweeping crackdown on illegal immigrants. Politicians pushing for immigration reform cite violence episodes like the Border Patrol shooting as proof that the state and federal governments need to better secure the border.

"It is a stark reminder of the very real dangers our men and women on the front lines confront everyday as they protect our communities and the American people," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. She plans to be in Arizona on Thursday and Friday to meet with Border Patrol agents in Nogales and Tucson.

The shooting occurred in the Border Patrol's Tucson sector, the busiest gateway for illegal immigrants into the United States. Half of the marijuana seizures along the 1,969-mile southern border are made in the sector, which covers 262 miles of the boundary.

Terry was part of an elite squad similar to a police SWAT team that was sent to a remote area north of Nogales known for border banditry, drug smuggling and violence, said Border Patrol Agent Brandon Judd, president of the local agents' union.

Terry and the other agents came across a group of five people. There was no sign that they were hauling drugs, but two were carrying rifles, said Judd, who didn't know what prompted the firefight.

Bonner, whose group represents 17,000 agents, said the fatal shooting shows that the border is still dangerous.

"This is a sign that the politicians and bureaucrats are overly optimistic in their assessment that the borders are more secure now than at any point in our history. It showed just the opposite," Bonner said.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who has railed against border violence and signed Arizona's new illegal-immigration law earlier this year, struck a similar tone.

"Although we needed no reminder of the ever-increasing dangers along our southern border, this tragedy serves as stark notice that the threats facing all who serve in protecting our state and nation are real and are increasing on a daily basis," Brewer said.

Terry, a native of the Detroit area, served in the Marines and as a police officer in the Michigan cities of Ecorse and Lincoln Park before joining the Border Patrol in 2007. He wasn't married and didn't have any children. He is survived by his mother, father, a brother and two sisters.

Terry's older sister, Michelle Terry-Balogh, told The Associated Press from Flat Rock, Mich., that her brother loved his job. "It was his life," she said. "He said it was very dangerous, but he loved what he did and wanted to make a difference."
.

Judge Dismisses Part of Challenge to Ariz. Immigration Law

.
Published December 11, 2010 | Associated Press

PHOENIX -- A federal judge has dismissed parts of the U.S. Department of Justice's challenge to Arizona's new immigration law.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton's ruling on Friday struck down the federal government's challenge to the portion of the law that prohibits the transport of illegal immigrants.

But Bolton's ruling didn't have any effect on the portions of the law that she previously prevented from taking effect, including a requirement that immigrants get or carry immigration registration papers.

In that ruling in July, Bolton let other portions take effect, including a ban on obstructing traffic while seeking or offering day-labor services on public streets.

Bolton on Friday denied Gov. Jan Brewer's request to dismiss challenges to the law's most controversial sections.

Nine Latin America countries join U.S. Justice Dept against Arizona

.
KTAR News
by KTAR.com (November 16th, 2010 @ 11:56am)

PHOENIX -- Anger about Arizona's tough immigration law has spread from Mexico throughout Latin America, according to a report in "USA Today."

Ecuador Ambassador Luis Gallegos told the United Nations Human Rights Council in early November that he is extremely concerned that the Arizona law will lead to widespread stereotyping of both legal and illegal immigrants.

The council included the Arizona law in its list of concerns sent to the U.S. State Department.

Ecuador and nine other Latin America countries have signed on to a brief supporting the U.S. Justice Department's suit challenging Arizona's law. A U.S. District court judge put the main parts of the law on hold just before it was to take effect in July. Arizona is appealing that ruling before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

State Department spokesman Charles Luoma-Overstreet told USA Today that the Arizona law has become a topic of discussion "in all our interactions" with Latin American countries.

Mauricio Cardenas, director of the Latin American Initiative at the Brookings Institution, said,

"The countries in Latin American are already perceiving some distance and disengagement from the U.S. The Arizona law makes Latin America more and more interested in developing stronger relations with other parts of the world."

In the brief filed in support of the Justice Department suit challenging Arizona's law, the 10 Latin America countries argue the law harms their citizens living and working in Arizona and could hurt "bilateral economic, immigration and security policies" between the United States and those countries.

Other states are considering immigration laws similar to Arizona's, and Gallegos said that is of significant concern.

"My basic question is, are we going to have a more protectionist United States that is more inclined to discriminating and persecuting groups like the migrants?" Gallegos said in an interview from Geneva. "We would hope that the federal government would be wise enough to enact a law which encompasses these issues."

Brewer said Arizona was forced to act and pass the law because the federal government has failed to secure the border and stop illegal immigration.
.

States Join Legal Brief Supporting Ariz. Immigration Law as Donations Roll Into Gov. Brewer's Defense Fund

.
Published September 04, 2010 | Associated Press

PHOENIX -- Nearly a dozen states have filed a legal brief in support of Arizona's controversial immigration  law.

A"friend of the court" brief filed with the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday argues that a federal judge was wrong to block implementation of key provisions of the law.

The brief submitted by Michigan Attorney General Michael Cox argues that the judge used the wrong legal standard to rule on the U.S. Justice Department's request for a preliminary injunction.

It also says the judge erred in ruling that the law interferes with the executive branch's immigration enforcement priorities.

Alabama, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia joined in the filing.

In addition to the legal brief, a Wyoming man has given more than $1.5 million to help defend Arizona's controversial immigration enforcement measure in court, Gov. Jan Brewer's office said Thursday.

The contribution from Timothy Mellon of Saratoga is the largest to Brewer's defense fund, which has amassed more than $3.6 million from 41,000 donors nationwide. Mellon could not immediately be reached for comment.

The latest legal bills released Thursday show Brewer's office has spent more than $440,000 for the first two months of defending the law.

The bills, obtained through a public records request by The Associated Press, are for work performed through June by Phoenix law firm Snell & Wilmer. They do not cover July hearings in federal court before a judge Susan Bolton temporarily blocked enforcement of the law's most controversial provisions.

Brewer has appealed Bolton's order to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Her office is defending the state against seven lawsuits challenging Arizona's law, including cases filed by the U.S. Justice of Department, civil rights groups and two police officers.

Bolton has dismissed two of the cases.

"The fees incurred have been, and will continue to be, sizeable," Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman said, noting there have been more than 900 legal filings totaling more than 12,000 pages.

Arizona's law would generally require officers enforcing other measures to check the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants.

.

Arizona Hits Back at Immigration Ruling as 'Wrong' on Law

.

Arizona Files Legal Brief Hitting Back at Federal Ruling Against State's Immigration Law

Published August 26, 2010 | FoxNews.com  

PHOENIX -- Gov. Jan Brewer's lawyers on Thursday filed the first brief in their appeal of a ruling that put the most controversial elements of Arizona's new immigration law on hold.

The governor says the federal ruling blocking portions of Arizona's controversial immigration law "has caused irreparable harm" to the state's residents.

Brewer wants the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to reverse the ruling U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton made last month.

The governor's office says Bolton abused her discretion by applying the wrong legal standards and basing her ruling on the federal government's speculation that it would be harmed by Arizona's law. Brewer says the judge ignored key provisions of federal law that allow states to enforce immigration law.

"The decision to suspend portions of SB 1070 has caused irreparable harm to the safety and well-being of Arizona's citizens who continue to suffer every day that the federal government refuses to do its job," Brewer said in a written statement.

The U.S. Justice Department went to court in a bid to invalidate the law.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment Thursday.

Bolton blocked provisions of the law that requires immigrants to obtain or carry immigration registration papers and that require police, while enforcing other laws, to question people's immigration status if there is a reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.

But the judge let other portions take effect late last month, such a ban on blocking traffic when people seek or offer day-labor services on streets, and amendments to existing state immigration laws.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.

Ariz. Shelves Plan to Alter Immigration Law

.
- Associated Press, August 18, 2010

PHOENIX -- Arizona legislators are setting aside Gov. Jan Brewer's suggestion that lawmakers consider changing parts of the state's controversial immigration law.

Brewer on July 30 floated the idea of making "tweaks" to the law shortly after a federal judge blocked implementation of numerous provisions. Legislative aides said Tuesday the idea has been shelved, at least temporarily, mainly because of the state's pending appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

"Everyone agreed ... that it would have been acting in haste to act at this point," said Victor Riches, chief of staff for the House of Representatives' Republican majority.

There's still a possibility that lawmakers could take up the issue in the future but nothing is in the works now, Riches added.

Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Brewer didn't suggest specific changes to the law but expressed a willingness to consider changes in response to the preliminary injunction issued July 28 by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton.

Legislative leaders voiced skepticism about Brewer's idea from the get-go but had aides review it before concluding that no immediate action should be taken.

"It's in the middle of the appeal process. We need to see how at least what the 9th Circuit says," said Greg Jernigan, general counsel to Senate Republicans.

Legislative aides said Brewer raised the possibility of considering changes to the immigration law during a brief special session held last week on an unrelated topic, but she ultimately didn't include it in her special session call.

Jernigan noted that the appellate court has agreed to put the case on a fast track, scheduling a hearing on the case in early November.

Although lawmakers could narrow the reach of a blocked provision barring release of arrested people pending checks of their immigration status, it wasn't realistic to consider changing other provisions blocked by Bolton on grounds that they're pre-empted by federal authority over immigration matters, Jernigan said.

The pre-emption issue will have to be settled by the courts, Jernigan added.

Besides the provision on immigration checks for arrested people, blocked provisions included a requirement that police check a person's status while enforcing other laws if there's a reasonable suspicion the person is in the United States illegally. Bolton also blocked provisions that required immigrants to carry their papers and banned immigrants from soliciting employment in public places.
.

Brewer: Send Obama Birthday Cake that Tells the Truth! - Aug 3 letter to Supporters of Arizona

.

Create A Cake!    

To celebrate his 49th birthday, President Obama’s campaign would like you to sign his birthday card thanking him for all of his “accomplishments.”

We have a better idea. Send the President a birthday cake that tells the truth.

President Obama has failed to secure the border and instead has opted to sue the state of Arizona for doing the job the feds won’t do. He has declined a personal invitation to come to Arizona and see the border for himself. He has pushed a healthcare agenda that will cost the states billions of dollars and he has handed out corporate bailouts that help Wall Street, but do nothing for Main Street.

Join us in sending the President a message

Happy Birthday Mr. President!  
Gov. Jan Brewer campaign, Aug 3, 8:30pm

Court Denies Arizona Speedy Appeal Process

.

Well, what can we expect from the 9th Circuit Court. Not expecting much from their eventual ruling, either. Might as well sit back, endure the 9th Circuit, and wait for the rulng that will matter; the USSC...

- Associated Press, July 30, 2010  

Arizona Appeal of Immigration Ruling Set For November

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court says it will hold a hearing in November on Arizona's challenge to a ruling that put the most controversial parts of the state's immigration law on hold.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco issued a two-page order Friday denying Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's request for an earlier hearing date.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton issued a ruling Wednesday putting much of the law on hold. Brewer had asked for an expedited appeals process, with a hearing scheduled for the week of Sept. 13.

State lawyers had argued that the appeal involves an issue of "significant importance" -- the state's right to implement a law to address "irreparable harm Arizona is suffering as a result of unchecked unlawful immigration."
.

Law Takes Effect, Ariz. Heads Back to Court

.
- FoxNews.com, July 29, 2010

Arizona's Altered Immigration Law Takes Effect, State Heads Back to Court

Arizona's court-altered illegal immigration law went into effect just after midnight Wednesday, hours after a federal judge blocked its most controversial provisions -- including on-the-spot police checks of suspected illegal immigrants.

Soon after Judge Susan Bolton's decision was announced, a spokesman for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said the state will appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco on Thursday, asking the appellate court for a swift decision to lift the injunction and allow the blocked provisions to take effect.

Brewer vowed to take the case "all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary," in a legal process that could take years to unravel, leaving other states considering similar laws in a legislative limbo.

While opponents of Arizona's strict immigration law are claiming victory after Wednesday's ruling, there's still plenty left in the state legislation that supporters are cheering.

As the case is litigated, Arizona will be able to block state officials from so-called "sanctuary city" policies limiting enforcement of federal law; require that state officials work with federal officials on illegal immigration; allow civil suits over sanctuary cities; and to make it a crime to pick up day laborers.

"We have a big problem with day laborers standing on the street disrupting traffic, disrupting communities, scaring people, and that part of the law withstood constitutionality," Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh told Fox News. "We'll be able to clean up that mess."

Kavanagh also praised the other sections of the law that were not blocked.

"I think it is a powerful deterrent effect and this is not going to be settled for years," he said. "So while we might not have as strong a deterrent as we had yesterday, it is still something for illegals to think about when they are looking for places to go."

State Senator Russell Pearce, the law's chief author, said he likes that the state will be able enforce a provision that bars local governments from limiting enforcement of federal immigration laws.

"Striking down these sanctuary city policies has always been the No. 1 priority," he said

Pearce said that part of Bolton's ruling removes what he calls "political handcuffs" from law enforcement officers whose superiors put restraints on their enforcement of immigration laws. He predicted the battle over the law would eventually end up in the Supreme Court, with Arizona prevailing.

"We will appeal this immediately and we will win on appeal," he told the Arizona Republic. "This will be to the Supreme Court eventually, and I expect a 5-4 decision in our favor, perhaps even 6-3."

The remaining provisions, many of them procedural and revisions to an Arizona immigration statute, took effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.

Still, many supporters were not pleased that the judge blocked the most controversial sections of the law. The partial injunction prevents Arizona from requiring police officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest. It also strikes down the provision making it a crime not to carry immigration registration papers and the provision that makes it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek or perform work.

"We are deeply disappointed that she views that the enforcement of law would impose a burden on the federal government," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Fox News. "The federal government is supposed to carry out its responsibilities of securing our borders. It's really disappointing."

"I think key provisions have been removed. Let's be honest about it," he said. "But also, the upshot of this is we gotta get the border secured. … Rather than wasting their time on all of this court stuff, all they had to do was give us the assets necessary to get our borders secured."

U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell, R-Ariz., said the ruling should not give Washington any kind of excuse not to address immigration.

"There are no victors today, except those who want to use this protracted litigation as a means to grandstand and score political points, instead of actually rolling up their sleeves and getting to work to help fix the problem," he said in a written statement."

"I believe that if the new state law spurs Washington to act, then it is a good thing," he said. "But make no mistake: neither the state law, nor the lawsuit to overturn it – nor today's temporary injunction – will fix the problem, secure our border, or fix a broken immigration system."

To Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio told KTAR.com that the ruling is not a "defeat by any means."

"We will still do what we have been doing for the past three years," he said in response to the ruling. "On employer sanction state law, on human smuggling state law," he said.

But the decision was seen as a defeat for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives.

But her opponent, state Attorney General Terry Goddard, pounced.

"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," the Democrat said. "It is time to look beyond election-year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
..

Gov. Brewer to Supporters, July 28, 9:45pm

.

To Supporters of Arizona :    

The United States District Court of Arizona ruled against significant parts of Arizona’s immigration law hours ago. This decision is being hailed by those who do not want to enforce our laws.

While the decision is disappointing, it is not the end. We plan to appeal the court’s ruling, and I remain confident we will ultimately prevail.

In order to best continue the fight for our immigration law, we must step up and expand our efforts.

That’s why I’m asking you to make a secure, online contribution to the Republican Governors Association right now by CLICKING HERE.  (https://www.rga.org/arizona/)

The RGA is the only organization exclusively dedicated to electing governors like me who are not afraid to do what it takes to protect our citizens and make our borders safe.

The RGA has stood by my side and has my complete confidence - I hope they will have yours too. We know liberals in Washington, D.C., the East Coast media, and people like Al Sharpton will continue to do everything possible to distort what our law does and smear anyone who endorses it, which is why it is vital you support the RGA.

The RGA helps governors like me who are willing to tell the federal government “enough is enough.” Simply put, the RGA is a key partner and with me on the frontlines.

Please support the RGA by contributing $100, $50, $25, $10 or whatever you can afford today. I know times are tough, but every dollar makes a tremendous difference. Please CLICK HERE to donate right now.

With your support, I am confident we will prevail.

Sincerely,

Gov. Jan Brewer

P.S. Our appeal will occur very soon. Please give to the RGA immediately: https://www.rga.org/arizona/

Corporate Contributions are accepted.

Contributions to the RGA are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Contributions will not be used in connection with any federal election activity. Contributions to the RGA may be used in one of the RGA's affiliated state PACs. Contributions from foreign nationals are prohibited.

Paid for by Republican Governors Association
.

Arizona Immigration Law Still a 'Powerful Deterrent'

.

- FoxNews.com, July 28, 2010 

While opponents of Arizona's strict immigration law are claiming victory in a federal ruling Wednesday that blocked most of the crackdown hours before its enactment, there's still plenty left in the state legislation that supporters are cheering.

As the case is litigated, Arizona will be able to block state officials from so-called "sanctuary city" policies limiting enforcement of federal law; require that state officials work with federal officials on illegal immigration; allow civil suits over sanctuary cities; and to make it a crime to pick up day laborers.

"We have a big problem with day laborers standing on the street disrupting traffic, disrupting communities, scaring people, and that part of the law withstood constitutionality," Arizona state Rep. John Kavanagh told Fox News. "We'll be able to clean up that mess."

Kavanagh also praised the other sections of the law that were not blocked.

"I think it is a powerful deterrent effect and this is not going to be settled for years," he said. "So while we might not have as strong a deterrent as we had yesterday, it is still something for illegals to think about when they are looking for places to go."

State Senator Russell Pearce, the law's chief author, said he likes that the state will be able enforce a provision that bars local governments from limiting enforcement of federal immigration laws.

"Striking down these sanctuary city policies has always been the No. 1 priority," Pearce said.

Pearce said that part of Judge Susan Bolton's ruling removes what he calls "political handcuffs" from law enforcement officers whose superiors put restraints on their enforcement of immigration laws.

The remaining provisions, many of them procedural and revisions to an Arizona immigration statute, will take effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday.

Still, many supporters were not pleased that the judge blocked the most controversial sections of the law. The partial injunction prevents Arizona from requiring police officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest. It also strikes down the provision making it a crime not to carry immigration registration papers and the provision that makes it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek or perform work.

"We are deeply disappointed that she views that the enforcement of law would impose a burden on the federal government," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told Fox News. "The federal government is supposed to carry out its responsibilities of securing our borders. It's really disappointing."

"I think key provisions have been removed. Let's be honest about it," he said. "But also, the upshot of this is we gotta get the border secured. … Rather than wasting their time on all of this court stuff, all they had to do was give us the assets necessary to get our borders secured."

U.S. Rep. Harry Mitchell, R-Ariz., said the ruling should not give Washington any kind of excuse not to address immigration.

"There are no victors today, except those who want to use this protracted litigation as a means to grandstand and score political points, instead of actually rolling up their sleeves and getting to work to help fix the problem," he said in a written statement."

"I believe that if the new state law spurs Washington to act, then it is a good thing," he said. "But make no mistake: neither the state law, nor the lawsuit to overturn it – nor today's temporary injunction – will fix the problem, secure our border, or fix a broken immigration system."

To Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio told KTAR.com that the ruling is not a "defeat by any means."

"We will still do what we have been doing for the past three years," he said in response to the ruling. "On employer sanction state law, on human smuggling state law," he said.

But the decision was seen as a defeat for Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who is running for another term in November and has seen her political fortunes rise because of the law's popularity among conservatives.

She has vowed to take the case "all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary."

But her opponent, state Attorney General Terry Goddard, pounced.

"Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," the Democrat said. "It is time to look beyond election-year grandstanding and begin to repair the damage to Arizona's image and economy."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.

Illegals Running before Law takes Effect

.
Reuter's sympathetic view uses the term "Migrant" rather than "Illegal Immigrant" and focuses on self-righteous slants rather than the true reason many are leaving; ie, they have family members that are involved in crime and they know they might easily be picked up. Being "cornered" as one person puts it, can only happen if one is doing things they shouldn't. 

Migrants sell up and flee Arizona ahead of crackdown 
By Tim Gaynor

PHOENIX | Sun Jul 25, 2010 1:43pm EDT

PHOENIX (Reuters) - Nicaraguan mother Lorena Aguilar hawks a television set and a few clothes on the baking sidewalk outside her west Phoenix apartment block.

A few paces up the street, her undocumented Mexican neighbor Wendi Villasenor touts a kitchen table, some chairs and a few dishes as her family scrambles to get out of Arizona ahead of a looming crackdown on illegal immigrants.

"Everyone is selling up the little they have and leaving," said Villasenor, 31, who is headed for Pennsylvania. "We have no alternative. They have us cornered."

The two women are among scores of illegal immigrant families across Phoenix hauling the contents of their homes into the yard this weekend as they rush to sell up and get out before the state law takes effect on Thursday.

The law, the toughest imposed by any U.S. state to curb illegal immigration, seeks to drive more than 400,000 undocumented day laborers, landscapers, house cleaners, chambermaids and other workers out of Arizona, which borders Mexico.

It makes being an illegal immigrant a state crime and requires state and local police, during lawful contact, to investigate the status of anyone they reasonably suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

The U.S. government estimates 100,000 unauthorized migrants left Arizona after the state passed an employer sanctions law three years ago requiring companies to verify workers' status using a federal computer system. There are no figures for the number who have left since the new law passed in April.

Some are heading back to Mexico or to neighboring states. Others are staying put and taking their chances.

In a sign of a gathering exodus, Mexican businesses from grocers and butcher shops to diners and beauty salons have shut their doors in recent weeks as their owners and clients leave.

On Saturday and Sunday, Reuters counted dozens of impromptu yard sales in Latino neighborhoods in central and west Phoenix/

"They wanted to drive Hispanics out of Arizona and they have succeeded even before the law even comes into effect," said Aguilar, 28, a mother of three young children who was also offering a few cherished pictures and a stereo at one of five sales on the same block.

She said she had taken in just $20 as "everyone is selling and nobody wants to buy."

LEGAL RESIDENTS FLEE

Arizona straddles the principal highway for human and drug smugglers heading into the United States from Mexico.

The state's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, signed the law in April in a bid to curb violence and cut crime stemming from illegal immigration.

Polls show the measure is backed by a solid majority of Americans and by 65 percent of Arizona voters in this election year for some state governors, all of the U.S. House of Representatives and about a third of the 100-seat Senate.

Opponents say the law is unconstitutional and a recipe for racial profiling. It is being challenged in seven lawsuits, including one filed by President Barack Obama's administration, which wants a preliminary injunction to block the law.

A federal judge heard arguments from the lawyers for the Justice Department and Arizona on Thursday and could rule at any time.

The fight over the Arizona law has complicated the White House's effort to break the deadlock with Republicans in Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration law, an already difficult task before November's elections.

While the law targets undocumented migrants, legal residents and their U.S.-born children are getting caught up in the rush to leave Arizona.

Mexican housewife Gabriela Jaquez, 37, said she is selling up and leaving for New Mexico with her husband, who is a legal resident, and two children born in Phoenix.

"Under the law, if you transport an illegal immigrant, you are committing a crime," she said as she sold children's clothes at a yard sale with three other families. "They could arrest him for driving me to the shops."

Lunaly Bustillos, a legal resident from Mexico, hoped to sell some clothes, dumbbells and an ornamental statue on Sunday before her family heads for Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Monday.

"It makes me sad and angry too because I feel I have the right to be here," said Bustillos, 17, who recently graduated from high school in Phoenix.

(Editing by John O'Callaghan)
.

No Ruling Yet After AZ Immigration Hearings

.

Printed from: http://www.kfiam640.com   

Two federal court hearings in Phoenix have ended without a ruling on whether the state's new immigration law should take effect amid a flurry of legal challenges.

The second of two hearings Thursday concluded without U.S. Judge Susan Bolton issuing a ruling.

The afternoon hearing focused on whether state law is trumped by the federal government's constitutional authority to set immigration policy.

During the morning hearing, Bolton said she's required to consider blocking only parts of the law, not the entire statute as some plaintiffs had requested.

The law requires officers, while enforcing other laws, to check a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion that the person is here illegally.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was in the packed courtroom in Phoenix fpr the afternoon sesion. Steve Gregory reports most of the protesters in front of the courthouse Thursday morning have gone by the afternoon.


.

Arizona Fights Obama's Immigration Suit, Blames Feds for 'Crushing Burden'

.
- FoxNews.com, July 21, 2010

Arizona urged a federal judge Tuesday to reject the Obama administration's challenge to its tough new immigration law, arguing the border state is acting within its powers.

Gov. Jan Brewer said President Obama is trying to prevent Arizona from protecting its citizens with the Justice Department suit, one of seven seeking to have the new law blocked before it goes into effect July 29.

The Tuesday filing said illegal immigration and a lack of comprehensive enforcement by the federal government has caused "crushing personal, environmental, criminal, and financial burdens" on Arizona.

"Arizona merely seeks to assist with the enforcement of existing federal immigration laws in a constitutional manner," lawyers for Brewer said. "It is [the Obama administration] that is attempting to impose immigration policies and priorities that contravene and conflict with federal law and unambiguous congressional intent."

The law requires officers, while enforcing other laws, to check a person's immigration status if there's reasonable suspicion that the person is here illegally.

In a statement, Brewer said she was "confident that the court will reject President Obama's attempt to prevent our state from protecting its citizens as a result of his failure to enforce federal immigration laws."

"My filing today makes clear that the federal government will suffer no harm if [the law] is implemented because the act requires only that Arizona's law enforcement officers act in accordance with their constitutional authority and congressionally established federal policy," she said.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton will hear oral arguments on Thursday and could issue a preliminary injunction if she finds that ultimately the Obama administration would succeed in its quest to have the law struck down.

The stakes are incredibly high. If Bolton rules in Arizona's favor, it opens the door to states taking on issues that have long been the responsibility of the federal government.

Bolton has ruled in two cases unrelated to immigration that federal law trumps state law.

In 2008, Bolton threw out a claim by a woman who alleged her employer broke a federal law on overtime pay. The woman made the claim under federal law but sought more generous damages under a state law dictating when an employee is to be paid. The judge threw out her claim under state law.

Three years earlier, in a lawsuit from a woman who claimed she was harmed by taking a cold medicine, Bolton ruled that a state law immunizing drug makers from most punitive damages in product liability cases was superseded by federal law.

Bolton has declined to be interviewed by The Associated Press about the Arizona law.

Bolton was born in 1951 and raised in Philadelphia, earned her undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Iowa and clerked for a state appeals court judge in Arizona. During her 11 years as an attorney in private practice, she co-authored a book that provides legal and clinical perspectives on violence in families.

She was appointed to the state bench in 1989 by Democratic Gov. Rose Mofford. When she was considered for a state Supreme Court post several years later, she was listed as an Independent. Her current voter registration records have been sealed.

Many lawyers who pressed cases in her court praised Bolton's meticulous reading of their filings. She asks tough questions, they said, and can handle the mountain of paper that's coming from the seven challenges to the law.

"I always felt like I got a fair shake out of her, even if she didn't rule my way," said Ed Novak, the former president of the State Bar of Arizona.

But Bolton's decisions haven't always been popular. In 2000, she struck from the ballot a land-preservation proposal advanced by the Arizona Legislature. The measure was a bid to counter a similar proposal by environmentalists that remained on the ballot.

Bolton said the Legislature's proposal violated a state constitutional requirement that ballot measures cannot cover more than one subject.

Critics called Bolton an activist judge, and accused her of working with the environmentalists to torpedo the Legislature's option.

"It seemed to me that it was more of a political decision than a decision based on fact," said Rusty Bowers, then the Senate majority leader.

Bolton's decision was reversed by the Arizona Supreme Court, and the measure appeared on the ballot and was defeated.

Paul Charlton, Arizona's top federal prosecutor from 2001 to 2007, said the criticism was unfair.

"It would be a mistake to put any kind of label on her," Charlton said. "This is someone who is not concerned with external political issues."

In any case, the lawyers in her courtroom shouldn't count on Bolton cutting them slack.

When government attorneys asked earlier this month for a last-minute hearing on whether to block Arizona's immigration law, Bolton called it laughable.

Under their timetable, Bolton would've had just 60 hours before the law took effect to decide whether to block it.

"That is completely unrealistic," Bolton said, instead setting the hearing for this week.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.

Brewer Sends Stimulus Money to Border for Illegal Immigration Fight

.

- FoxNews.com, July 20, 2010  

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, claiming to "reject" the Obama administration's assertion that the border is more secure than ever, announced Monday that she's directing $10 million in federal stimulus dollars to tackle smuggling and illegal immigration.

On the same day the administration announced its plan to send 1,200 National Guard troops to the southwestern states, Brewer said she's sending the pot of stimulus money to more than a dozen border cities and counties -- as well as several tribes and the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

She said the grant money would be targeted toward fighting drug trafficking, illegal immigration and human smuggling.

"Since the federal government continues to announce inadequate plans and place new warning signs on federal lands in Arizona, we are forced to do what we can locally to act on safety and security until the Congress and the administration act," she said in a statement. Brewer has said the National Guard deployment, which is directing more than 500 troops to her state alone, is not enough to handle the problem.

The border security stimulus money comes out of the stimulus package's State Fiscal Stabilization Fund. Though most of that money is intended to go toward education, states are allowed to use a small percentage toward public safety and "other government services." Brewer claimed in her statement that she was using her "discretionary" money pile to fight illegal immigration.

The grant money in Arizona will be active until September 2011. The money is primarily meant for paying law enforcement training costs and overtime, as well as travel costs and other expenses, and for bringing on new police officers and part-time personnel. The grant also can be used to buy certain equipment, like vehicles built for the "harsh environment" along the border and communications equipment.

The recipients include Yuma County, Santa Cruz County, Pima County, Cochise County, as well as the cities and towns of Benson, Bisbee, Yuma, Douglas, Nogales, Patagonia, Sahuarita, San Luis and Somerton.
.

Supporters Donate $500G to Defend Arizona Law

.

- Associated Press, July 08, 2010  

PHOENIX -- Retirees and other residents from all over the country were among those who donated nearly $500,000 to help Arizona defend its immigration enforcement law, with most chipping in $100 or less, according to an analysis of documents obtained Thusday by The Associated Press.

The donations, 88 percent of which came from through the defense fund's website, surged this week after the federal government sued Tuesday to challenge the law. A document from Gov. Jan Brewer's office showed that 7,008 of the 9,057 online contributions submitted by Thursday morning were made in the days following the government's filing.

Website contributions came from all 50 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, and nearly 2,000 came from within Arizona. Donations ranged from $5 to $2,000, with the vast majority between $10 and $100.

The Arizona law includes a requirement that police enforcing another law must investigate the immigration status of people if there is "reasonable suspicion" to believe the people are in the United States illegally.

Brewer and other supporters say the law will prompt illegal immigrants to leave the state and that state action was required by a failure of the federal government to secure the border.

Opponents say the law will promote racial profiling and is unconstitutional because regulating immigration is reserved for the federal government.

Donors contacted by the AP said they contributed because the federal government should be helping Arizona, not taking the state to court.

"Arizona needs our help," said Mary Ann Rohde, a retired municipal worker who lives in Rialto, Calif., who donated $20 with her husband. "It's a disgrace what our government is doing."

Howard E. Sanner, of Houston, said Arizona's approval of its law should help prod the federal government to act on border security to help prevent criminals and terrorists from entering the country illegally.

"It's just a mess that has to be straightened out," said Sanner, a retired clothing and linen salesman who said he supports legal immigration and donated $5 to the fund.

With the federal lawsuit, the law enacted in April and set to take effect July 29 is now the subject of six lawsuits now pending in federal court. Other plaintiffs include civil rights groups, individuals and several Arizona municipalities.

Brewer established the Governor's Border Security and Immigration Legal Defense Fund with an executive order on May 26. Her office said the state had received about $10,000 in unsolicited donations from people in dozens of states by then.

It's unclear what the state's legal costs will be in defending the law. Snell & Wilmer, the Phoenix-based law firm representing the state in the pending challenges, told a federal judge Wednesday that its lawyers were working late into the evening to respond to all the filings in the cases.

Citing the crush of filings in the case, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton has imposed limits on the size of so-called "friend of the court" briefs filed by groups in support or opposition to the law.

Brewer hired the private lawyers to represent the state even before the Democratic attorney general, Terry Goddard, agreed to Brewer's demand to withdraw from the state's defense. He had opposed the legislation but said he was willing to do his duty to defend the state law.
.

Brewer to Supporters, re: Federal Lawsuit July 6, 2010 5:08pm

.

Arizona needs your help to defend against Obama lawsuit


Today, we received official notice of the federal government’s lawsuit against the state of Arizona. 


I am sure you will agree with me that the Administration’s lawsuit is an outrageous use of taxpayer money and a sure sign that the President is more interested in politics than securing our southern border.

This lawsuit follows the President’s immigration speech in which he called for comprehensive immigration reform that – not surprisingly – includes a path to citizenship for those who entered our country illegally.

Let me be clear, I will defend the rule of law all the way to the Supreme Court of this land if necessary. I will continue to demand that the Federal government live up to its responsibility to control our Southern border and to protect our homeland. And, I will oppose the President’s amnesty plan.

But I need your immediate help today.

In order to respond to President Obama’s lawsuit I have set up a legal defense fund to pay the legal fees that Arizona has been forced to incur as a result of all of these lawsuits.

I urge all Americans who want a secure border to contribute to this fund immediately.

This is not just an Arizona issue, this is an American issue. Are we or are we not going to enforce the rule of law in America? The burden alone should not be shouldered by Arizonans. Arizona needs you to answer the call today, right now.

Click here to contribute now.

Make no mistake; Arizona’s immigration law affects the safety and well-being of every U.S. citizen. The federal government has failed to enforce the rule of law.

As long as the Federal Government refuses to do its job, I will ensure that Arizona continues to live by a rule of law.

Your immediate donation of $250, $125, $75 or whatever you can afford you can afford will go directly into fighting President Obama’s lawsuit. I do ask that you make this very important commitment today so we can immediately begin to defend against the President’s actions.

Arizona is the front line of our nation’s illegal immigration crisis. The federal government is broken and our border is not secure. That is why Arizona had to act.

I will not stop fighting to protect our country. I will defend us in federal court and we will continue to do the job President Obama refuses to do.

Join me today by clicking here now.

Sincerely,

Governor Jan Brewer
.

Judge Lets Mexico Have Voice in Court Case Against U.S. Immigration Law

.

- FoxNews.com, July 01, 2010  

Mexico gets its a say in one of the lawsuits challenging Arizona's immigration enforcement law.

A federal judge on Thursday granted Mexico's request to be allowed to file a legal brief supporting the challenge. That means the judge will consider the brief Mexico submitted previously.

Mexico says it wants to defend its citizens' rights and that the law would lead to racial profiling and hinder trade and tourism. It also says the law would hinder work against drug trafficking and related violence.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law on April 23 and changes to it on April 30, has lawyers defending it in court.

In a statement issued last week, Brewer said she was "very disappointed" to learn of Mexico's filing and reiterated that "Arizona's immigration enforcement laws are both reasonable and constitutional."

"I believe that Arizona will ultimately prevail and that our laws will be found constitutional," Brewer added.

Brewer and other supporters of the bill say the law is intended to pressure illegal immigrants to leave the United States. They contend it is a needed response to federal inaction over what they say is a porous border and social problems caused by illegal immigration. They also argue that it has protections against racial profiling.

The law's provisions include a requirement that police enforcing another law ask people about their immigration status if there's a "reasonable suspicion" they're in the country illegally.

The law takes effect July 29 unless blocked by a court.

Until recently, Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense -- anyone arrested for the violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. Mexican lawmakers changed that in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but their law still reads an awful lot like Arizona's.

Arizona's policy, which President Felipe Calderon derided during a recent U.S. trip as "discriminatory," states police can't randomly stop people and demand papers, and the law prohibits racial profiling.

Mexican law, however, requires law enforcement officials "to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues."

Amnesty International recently issued a report claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico -- typically from Central America -- face abuse, rape and kidnappings, and that Mexican police do little to stop it. When illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico, officials were known to seek bribes from suspects to keep them out of jail.

But Mexico said it has a legitimate interest in defending its citizens' rights and that Arizona's law would lead to racial profiling, hinder trade and tourism, and strain the countries' work on combating drug trafficking and related violence.

.