Flood of Border Agents Confirm Feds' No-Apprehension Policy

By Jana Winter

Published April 19, 2011 | FoxNews.com  

An Arizona sheriff says he has been flooded with calls and emails of support from local and federal agents who back his claims that the U.S. Border Patrol has effectively ordered them to stop apprehending illegal immigrants crossing the U.S.-Mexican border.

“Upper management has advised supervisors to have agents ‘turn back South’ (TBS) the illegal aliens (aka bodies) they detect attempting to unlawfully enter the country … at times you even hear supervisors order the agents over the radio to 'TBS' the aliens instead of catching them,” one San Diego border agent wrote in an email to Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever.

“This only causes more problems as the aliens, as you know, don't just go back to Mexico and give up. They keep trying, sometimes without 10 minutes in-between attempts, to cross illegally,” continued the email, which was among a number of communications to Dever reviewed by FoxNews.com. “This makes the job for agents more dangerous. Not only are the aliens more defiant, they also begin to feel like they can get away with breaking our federal laws.”

The email is one of more than 100 messages Dever said he received from active and retired Border Patrol agents and law enforcement officers from across the country. Many wrote of what they said was their own experience and first-hand knowledge of Border Patrol’s efforts to reduce apprehension numbers by making fewer arrests.

FoxNews.com first reported this month that Dever said several Border Patrol officials, including at least one senior supervisor, told him they had been directed to keep the number of border apprehensions down by chasing illegal immigrants back toward Mexico. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has recently cited a reduction in border apprehensions as evidence of an increasingly secure border.

Three days after FoxNews.com’s initial report, Border Patrol chief Michael Fisher sent a letter to Dever in which he denied the accusations and invited the sheriff on a ride-along with federal agents at border.

"That assertion is completely, 100 percent false," Fisher wrote in the letter. "That it comes from a fellow law enforcement official makes it especially offensive."

But accounts from law enforcement officials around the country continue to pour in supporting Dever and the conversations he says he had with Border Patrol officers, including at least one supervisor, about keeping arrest numbers down.

“This is nothing new, during my career with the border patrol, this was done regularly,” said another email to Dever reviewed by FoxNews.com. “By assigning agents to different tasks, locations, etc., the apprehensions can be increased or decreased dramatically,” wrote Dan McCaskill Jr., a retired Border Patrol agent who worked in the Anti-Smuggling Unit.

McCaskill went on to describe how, he said, apprehension numbers were regularly manipulated to achieve various budget, equipment or manpower goals.

In response to request for comment on the new allegations, Homeland Security offered the same statement from Jeffery Self, commander of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Joint Field Command, that was provided to FoxNews.com earlier this month:

“As the commander for border enforcement operations in Arizona, I can confirm that the claim that Border Patrol supervisors have been instructed to underreport or manipulate our statistics is unequivocally false. I took an oath that I take very seriously and I find it insulting that anyone, especially a fellow law enforcement officer, would imply that we would put the protection of the American public and security of our nation’s borders in danger just for a numbers game. Our mission does not waiver based on political climate and it never will. To suggest that we are ambiguous in enforcing our laws belittles the work of more than 6,000 CBP employees in Arizona who dedicate their lives to protect our borders every day.”

Local 2544, the Tucson branch of the National Border Patrol Council union, has also come out in support of Dever, and posted this message on their website after the FoxNews.com report.

“Sheriff Dever is right. We have seen so many slick shenanigans pulled in regards to 'got-aways' and entry numbers that at times it seems David Copperfield is running the Border Patrol. Creating the illusion that all is well and you can start having family picnics in the areas where we work has been going on far too long. Has there been improvement in some areas? Absolutely. Is the border anywhere near 'under control'? Absolutely not. Do some in management play games with numbers and cater to the wishes of politicians like Janet Napolitano and David Aguilar? Resoundingly, yes. Time for the foolish political games to stop.”

The union posted another response on their website following Fox News’ publication of Fisher’s April 6 letter to Dever:

“Just remember, for years now we have been told from the highest ranking managers in our agency that 'every apprehension is a FAILURE' (Johnny Williams - former INS Western Region Director), and that we 'are NOT immigration officers' (current CBP Deputy Commissioner David Aguilar to Border Patrol agents when he was the Chief of the Border Patrol)…. We have been told that - Apprehensions = failure, we are not 'immigration' officers, we should not 'lower' ourselves to the status of an immigration officer, and our primary job is not apprehending illegal aliens. Couple all this with Secretary Napolitano's recent public announcement about what she expects our apprehension numbers to be this fiscal year, and it's not hard to figure this thing out.”

A second Arizona sheriff, Paul Babeu of Pinal County, also testified at a Senate Homeland Security Committee last week in support of Dever’s charges. Dever was slated to appear at the hearing, but said he could no longer attend when the date of his appearance was changed.

Asked specifically about Dever’s assertion that agents were told to turn back illegals to reduce apprehensions, Babeu told the committee he’d specifically asked his top lieutenant, Matt Thomas, about the claims.

"He said, 'Sheriff, I have heard that myself directly from border agents in the Tucson sector,'" Babeu testitified.

Babeu told FoxNews.com he’s been told by Border Patrol officials that for every person apprehended at the border, an average of 2.7 succeed in crossing into the U.S. With those numbers, he said he was concerned paramilitary or terror cells equipped with more sophisticated support and training could easily get through.

“This is no longer just public security threat, this is national security threat,” he told FoxNews.com.

T.J. Bonner, retired president of the National Border Patrol Council, said in an interview with FoxNews.com that he’s familiar with “TBS-ing” and shares Babeu’s concerns about criminals and terrorists crossing the border.

“TBS has been going on for a number of years. You’ll never find orders in writing, and some agents have even been disciplined for TBS-ing people. That’s a practice that dates back to quite some time, to try and discourage is part of their 'strategy of deterrence.'"

Bonner said Border Patrol agents are receiving “TBS” orders from someone higher up, but he isn’t sure who.

“Agents don’t just do this on their own. The orders must come from on high. They don’t just wake up one day and say I’m going to risk my job, my livelihood,” said Bonner, who retired last year after 32 years with Border Patrol. “I’m not sure if it’s Napolitano or folks in Customs and Border Protection, but somebody wants to silence critics in Arizona to claim success in Arizona.”

As for Dever, he says he’s just hoping that some good will come out of this.

“Frankly, I don't want to create a firestorm," he said. "I only want this problem solved.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/19/arizona-sheriff-cites-flood-border-agents-confirming-feds-apprehension-policy/#ixzz1KYJkL2tC

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.

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.
.

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."
.

Arizona Sheriff: I Won't Be Stopped, Intimidated

.
- FoxNews.com, July 30, 2010

Arizona Sheriff Not Relenting After Court Ruling 

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been doing aggressive crackdowns on illegal immigration for years. And despite Wednesday's ruling by a federal judge to temporarily block portions of Arizona's new law, the former federal drug agent will continue to carry out sweeps in the country's busiest human and drug trafficking corridor.

Arpaio's tactics have made him the undisputed poster boy for local immigration enforcement, sometimes instructing his deputies to carry out sweeps in Hispanic neighbors to arrest illegal immigrants. His latest sweep was launched Thursday afternoon, when roughly 200 sheriff's deputies and trained volunteers searched metropolitan Phoenix for traffic violators who may be in the country illegally.

"It's my job," said Arpaio, standing beside a sheriff's truck that has a number for an immigration hotline written on its side. "I have two state (immigration) laws that I am enforcing. It's not federal, it's state."

According to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement statistics, Arpaio's efforts are not misguided, as a total of 55,699 individuals have been deported from the Phoenix field office in fiscal year 2010, easily besting the second-most deportations during that time -- 38,569 -- in the San Antonio area. A total of 268,910 illegal immigrants have been deported as of July 13, 2010, compared to 387,790 for the entire fiscal year 2009.

Deputy Bob Dalton and volunteer Heath Kowacz spotted a driver with a cracked windshield in a poor Phoenix neighborhood near a busy freeway during Thursday's sweep. Dalton triggered the red and blue police lights and pulled over 28-year-old Alfredo Salas, who was born in Mexico but has lived in Phoenix with a resident alien card since 1993.

Dalton gave him a warning after Salas produced his license and registration and told him to get the windshield fixed.

Salas, a married father of two who installs granite, told The Associated Press that he was treated well but he wondered whether he was pulled over because his truck is a Ford Lobo.

"It's a Mexican truck so I don't know if they saw that and said, 'I wonder if he has papers or not,"' Salas said. "If that's the case, it kind of gets me upset."

Sixty percent of the nearly 1,000 people arrested in the sweeps since early 2008 have been illegal immigrants. Thursday's dragnet led to four arrests, but it wasn't clear if any of them were illegal immigrants.

A ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday put on hold parts of S.B. 1070 that would have required officers to dig deeper into the fight against illegal immigration. Arizona says it was forced to act because the federal government isn't doing its job to fight immigration.

The issue led to demonstrations across the country Thursday, including one directed at Arpaio in Phoenix in which protesters beat on the metal door of a jail and changed "Sheriff Joe, we are here. We will not live in fear."

Meanwhile, Gov. Jan Brewer's lawyers went to court to overturn the judge's ruling so they can fight back against what the Republican calls an "invasion" of illegal immigrants.

Ever since the main flow of illegal immigrants into the country shifted to Arizona a decade ago, state politicians and local police have been feeling pressure to confront the state's border woes.

In addition to Arpaio's crackdowns, other efforts include a steady stream of busts by the state and local police of stash houses where smugglers hide illegal immigrants. The state attorney general has taken a money-wiring company to civil court on allegations that smugglers used their service to move money to Mexico. And a county south of Phoenix has its sheriff's deputies patrol dangerous smuggling corridors.

The Arizona Legislature have enacted a series of tough-on-immigration measures in recent years that culminated with the controversial new law signed by Brewer in April, catapulting the Republican to the national political stage.

Critics say deputies racially profile Hispanics. Arpaio says deputies approach people only when they have probable cause.

"Sheriff Joe Arpaio and some other folks there decided they can make a name for themselves in terms of the intensity of the efforts they're using," said Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center. "There's no way to deny that. There are a lot of people getting caught up in these efforts."

The Justice Department launched an investigation of his office nearly 17 months ago over allegations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. Although the department has declined to detail its investigation, Arpaio believes it centers on his sweeps.

Arpaio feels no reservations about continuing to push the sweeps, even after the federal government stripped his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests.

Unable to make arrests under a federal statute, the sheriff instead relied on a nearly 5-year-old state law that prohibits immigrant smuggling. He has also raided 37 businesses in enforcing a state law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.

"I'm not going to brag," Arpaio said. "Just look at the record. I'm doing what I feel is right for the people of Maricopa County."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.

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
.

Obama Pushes for National Standard on Immigration, Urges GOP to Back Overhaul

.

- FoxNews.com, July 01, 2010  

Prodding Republicans to get onboard, President Obama on Thursday called on Congress to tackle a comprehensive immigration overhaul and warned that a failure to do so could trigger a harmful "patchwork" of local laws similar to the one recently passed in Arizona.

While Arizona lawmakers defend their law as necessary to patrol the border, Obama described it as "unenforceable" and a vehicle for civil rights abuse. He said a "national standard" is needed and that he won't "kick the can down the road" any longer.

"I'm ready to move forward, the majority of Democrats are ready to move forward, and I believe the majority of Americans are ready to move forward," Obama said.

The president blamed Republicans for exacerbating the problem. He suggested places like Arizona are unilaterally taking up the issue because GOP senators backed away from immigration reform following the debate several years ago led by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. Obama blamed political posturing and "demagoguery" for Washington's inability to deal with the problem, pressing Republicans to step up.

"The fact is without bipartisan support, as we had just a few years ago, we cannot solve this problem," Obama said at American University in Washington, D.C.

One of those senators, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., told Fox News he wasn't basing his resistance on "demagoguery." He said he's pressing for better border security first because that's what his constituents want.

"It was very political," Kyl said of the speech.

But Obama cast his legislative pitch as an attempt to find middle ground between the two "poles" of the debate. He criticized the idea of granting "blanket amnesty" as well as the idea of deporting all illegal immigrants. Rather, he called for a "pathway to legal status" that would have illegal immigrants get in line and pay a fine.

"The overwhelming majority of these men and women are simply seeking a better life for themselves and their children," he said.

Obama called for reforms to the legal immigration system and defended the attempts his administration has made so far to improve border security -- though Kyl said it's not enough.

Amid cries for tougher enforcement on one side and leniency on the other, Obama said he hears the "frustration" Americans have expressed about a "system that seems fundamentally broken."

He said that system would be "no exception" to the national challenges he's committed to tackling.

The call to action is a heavy lift for the president, who is keeping Congress' plate overflowing. As he tries pulling a financial regulation package over the finish line and begins implementing provisions of the health care bill, he's also pushing anew for action on a climate package. The speech on immigration follows back-to-back meetings Obama had with advocates and lawmakers at the White House this week.

The controversial Arizona immigration law may have served as the impetus for a stepped-up federal push -- but it also highlighted how critical border-state lawmakers view the enforcement end of the debate.

Republicans have cautioned the president not to push ahead with a comprehensive immigration package until he does more to physically secure the border. And as Obama said, the political reality is that to get a bill he needs Republican support, mostly in the Senate, where Democrats fall short of the 60 votes needed to overcome GOP stalling tactics.

Obama has endorsed a proposal by Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., that would require illegal immigrants, among other things, to admit they broke the law, pay fines and back taxes and perform community service to eventually obtain legal status. But Graham since has balked at acting on immigration this year, and no other Senate Republican has come forward.

Obama's administration has acted to improve border security, including increasing personnel and equipment along the border. Obama recently ordered 1,200 National Guard troops to the border to boost security and asked Congress for an additional $600 million to support personnel and improve technology there. More than 500 of those troops are to be sent to Arizona.

The Arizona law requires police enforcing another statute to clarify a person's immigration status if there's reason to believe the individual is in the U.S. illegally. Several states and communities are considering similar legislation, which Obama says is an understandable byproduct of the public's frustration over the federal government's inability to tighten the immigration system.

But Obama also has criticized the law as "misguided" and said it is potentially discriminatory. He has asked the Justice Department to review its legality and immigrant advocates are hoping the government will sue Arizona to block the law from taking effect later this month.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.
.

Obama Administration Sues Arizona Over SB 1070

.

Fox Business, Tuesday, July 06, 2010 

WASHINGTON--The Obama administration Tuesday sued Arizona over the state's strict new immigration law in a move that drew fire from Republicans who said the border needed more security.

The Arizona law requires state and local police to investigate the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect of being an illegal immigrant, provoking criticism that it is unconstitutional and would sap law enforcement resources.

The Republican-controlled Arizona legislature passed the law to try to stem the flood of thousands of illegal immigrants who cross its border from Mexico each month and to cut down on drug trafficking and other crimes in the area.

The lawsuit, filed while Congress was on a week-long break, is part of a broader approach by President Barack Obama to deal with the 10.8 million illegal immigrants believed to be in the country, arguing that immigration is the responsibility of the federal government not each state.

The legal action is a political gamble by the administration as a Pew Research Center poll showed 59 percent of people approve of the Arizona crackdown.

The Arizona law would "interfere with vital foreign policy and national security interests by disrupting the United States' relationship with Mexico and other countries," the Justice Department said in the 25-page lawsuit.

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit in federal court in Arizona and asked for a preliminary and permanent injunction against the controversial law, which is slated to take effect on July 29.

The legal fight also comes at a critical juncture, four months ahead of the mid-term congressional elections and the Hispanic community has been a major voting bloc that typically has sided with Democrats but Republicans have tried to woo.

Republicans condemned the lawsuit, saying the law had not yet taken effect therefore any challenge was premature and that the new was needed because the federal government had failed to deal with the issue.

"The Obama administration has not done everything it can do to protect the people of Arizona from the violence and crime illegal immigration brings to our state," the two Republican senators from Arizona, John McCain and Jon Kyl, said in a statement.

RAISING QUESTIONS

Administration officials and critics have condemned the law, raising questions about whether it was constitutional and could lead to racial profiling and broaden a rift with Hispanics, a rapidly growing population in the United States.

Obama has warned that the Arizona law could lead to a patchwork of different laws passed by the various U.S. states and said that the matter should be resolved at the federal level by Congress.

Last week he gave his first major speech on immigration reform since taking office, calling for both political sides to join together to pass a comprehensive measure, but it has largely been overshadowed by the economic crisis and the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

"Reform that brings accountability to our immigration system cannot pass without Republican votes. That is the political and mathematical reality," Obama said.

Obama has backed allowing undocumented immigrants in good standing to pay a fine, learn English and become citizens. He also has supported tightening border security and clamping down on employers that hire undocumented workers.

But opposing Republicans have said that border security must be significantly improved before dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants, many of them Hispanics, in the country.

Mexico and several civil liberties groups have opposed the Arizona measure, and several other legal challenges are pending in federal court in the state.

Obama has pledged to spend an extra $600 million and send up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexican border to tighten security, however the initial steps to do so have been criticized as too little to address the problem.

The case is United States of America v. State of Arizona et al; Case No. 10-cv-1413 in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.

.

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
.

Widow of Houston Officer Killed by Illegal Immigrant 'Shocked' at ICE Appointment

.

FOXNews.com - June 25, 2010

The widow of a Houston police officer killed by an illegal immigrant was "shocked" to learn that the city's former police chief has landed a top immigration job with the Obama administration, her lawyer told FoxNews.com on Friday.

That's because Joslyn Johnson, whose husband, Rodney Johnson, was killed in 2006, is suing former Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt for failing to enforce federal immigration laws. She claims her husband would be alive today if the city had bothered to check up on the gunman's immigration status.

Now that Hurtt is taking a job to oversee partnerships between federal and local officials with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Johnson -- and other critics -- say they're concerned the official who resisted immigration enforcement in Houston will now be in charge of promoting it.

"She was shocked at the irony," Johnson's attorney, Ben Dominguez, said.

As a police chief, Hurtt was a supporter of "sanctuary city" policies, by which illegal immigrants who don't commit crimes can live without fear of exposure or detainment because police don't check for immigration papers. During his tenure as Houston police chief, he criticized ICE's key program that draws on local law enforcement's support. He said in 2008 that local police "don't want to be immigration officers." He described that as a burden on the force.

Several years after the killing, Hurtt announced he would participate in the federal 287(g) program, which gives local police authority to initiate deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants linked to serious crimes. But then the city backed off the program and linked up with ICE on a separate one that has local officials run immigration checks on suspects once they are in jail.

Johnson could not speak directly to FoxNews.com because she is also a member of the Houston police force and subject to rules prohibiting her from commenting on department policy.

Dominguez, speaking on her behalf, said Johnson believes Hurtt is "competent" but hopes he does not spearhead policies that will put officers in harm's way.

"If (his federal policy is) similar to Houston's policy, then it's going to continue to endanger private citizens and officers," Dominguez said.

The gunman who killed Johnson's husband had already been deported once, returned and then arrested at least three times before he shot the officer. Johnson's original court petition -- naming Hurtt as well as the city and the police department -- claimed that the department's failure to discover the gunman's immigration status and report him to federal authorities enabled him to stay "at large" in the country.

Dominguez said officers at the time were not checking the immigration status of suspects.

Johnson's suit is not seeking monetary damages, aside from attorney fees -- it is seeking a change in policy so that federal immigration databases are widely available to local departments. Hurtt is still a party to the lawsuit but has not been served because he left the force, Dominguez said.

Kelly Nantel, a spokeswoman for ICE, told FoxNews.com that Hurtt has always been a proponent of the jail model of the 287(g) program, but as a police chief, he didn't favor more proactive local enforcement because he didn't believe it was the best utilization of his resources.

"I think the critics are only talking about half of what he said," she said. "He's always been a strong proponent of every law enforcement agency making those decisions on their own."

But the criticism has been strong.

Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, questioned whether Hurtt was the right choice for the job.

"Here he is, he should be standing up for the letter of federal law," King said. "I don't know how he can do that given the record that he has. I think this is another piece in the puzzle to granting some type of de facto amnesty."

Hurtt, a former police chief in Houston and Phoenix, will assume the position of director for the ICE Office of State and Local Coordination. Starting July 6, Hurtt will supervise outreach and communication between ICE, local law enforcement agencies, tribal leaders and representatives from non-governmental organizations.

Aside from the Houston case, Hurtt's policies have been blamed for enabling illegal immigrants to kill two police officers and seriously injure another in Phoenix before he left in 2005.

But Nantel dismissed such allegations.

"The responsibility of those homicides lies on the shoulder of the individuals who committed the crimes," Nantel said.

.