Judge puts brakes on 1070

[ilbegone]

Judge puts brakes on action in Arizona immigration case

The future of Arizona's controversial Senate Bill 1070 will remain in limbo until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issues a ruling, a federal court judge decided Friday.

And there's no telling when that will be.

The appeals court heard arguments on Nov. 1 regarding U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton's decision to halt most of the key provisions of SB 1070, which was signed into law last April, from going into effect.

Bolton said Friday that she had been waiting to move forward with the lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the law's constitutionality until there was a ruling on her injunction. It's now been five months, she said.

"I had anticipated that we would have had a decision. I was betting for February and now March has come and gone," Bolton said, saying she gets no advance notice on when a ruling may come and that it could happen tomorrow or in a year.

Bolton said she was reluctant to continue to wait, but she and attorneys representing the federal government on one side and the state and Gov. Jan Brewer on the other agreed that they couldn't move forward with the underlying case until they had an appeals court decision.

Bolton said once an appeals court ruling does come down, the two sides will have 30 days to let her know whether they will appeal again, which could go as high as the U.S. Supreme Court.

But there are some things that will happen while they continue to wait.

Bolton said they will move forward with a countersuit Brewer filed in February alleging that the federal government has failed to secure the border.

Varu Chilakamarri with the U.S. Department of Justice said they will file a motion to dismiss the countersuit within the next couple of weeks.

Bolton also will make a decision on a request by Senate President Russell Pearce, the author of SB 1070, to join the lawsuit as a defendant. She had initially denied Pearce's request, but the Legislature passed a measure earlier this year authorizing Pearce and Speaker of the House Kirk Adams to intervene on behalf of the Legislature.

Brewer supports Pearce's request; the U.S. Department of Justice opposes it. Friday, Bolton heard arguments from all the involved parties.

Pearce said he needs a seat at the table because he can best explain the intent of the Legislature in writing and passing SB 1070.

"I think we would enhance the debate," he said. "This impacts the entire nation, and we need to be at the table."

Attorney Paul Orfanedes with the conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch is representing Pearce at no cost to the state.

He admitted to Bolton that it is unprecedented for a Legislature to ask to join a lawsuit in which state or gubernatorial attorneys are already defending a state law. But he said passing a law saying that the state wants the Legislature to be represented in such a case also has never happened.

"This is the Legislature's baby. It knows this very controversial legislation better than anybody else," he said.

Chilakamarri said it would be unwarranted and unprecedented for Bolton to allow Pearce to intervene just because the state passed a law saying he could.

Bolton said she would rule on the matter later, but gave the impression that she may deny Pearce's request. She said she was concerned that adding another party to the case would mean more lawyers, more documents filed and more time.

"You are really not offering me anything that says the interests of the state Legislature are not being adequately represented," she told Orfanedes.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/electi...ing-limbo.html