By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
PHOENIX — As the Arizona governor on Thursday formally appealed a federal judge’s ruling that prevented the most contested parts of the state’s immigration law from taking effect, a burst of protest and recrimination made clear the ruling had hardly soothed emotions in the state.
The new law technically went into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, but major provisions of it, including one giving police officers a larger role in enforcing immigration violations, were suspended Wednesday by the court order.
Judge Susan R. Bolton of Federal District Court, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the Obama administration, said the provisions should be halted until there could be a trial on whether they would interfere with federal authority on immigration and subject legal residents to unwarranted scrutiny.
The parts of the law that were suspended called for police officers to check a person’s immigration status, when they were suspicious of it, while enforcing other laws and required immigrants to prove that they were authorized to be in the country.
The United States Marshals Service here said Judge Bolton received death threats on Thursday, as anger flamed unabated on both sides of the controversy and protesters took to the streets.
One prominent opponent of illegal immigration, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, who patrols metropolitan Phoenix and administers the jails, said he was continuing with his duties.
“It’s business as normal,” Sheriff Arpaio said as he announced the beginning of another of his controversial crime sweeps — which inevitably lead to the arrests of illegal immigrants on state smuggling charges and are unaffected by the court order.
About the same time Sheriff Arpaio made the remark, his deputies and the police a few miles away were busy arresting some 30 people who blocked downtown streets and one of his jails or were accused of refusing to follow police orders during a march by hundreds of people against the law.
“I’m here because the injunction is temporary and it can be overturned,” said Kirk Snow, 43, one of the protesters.
A rally is planned for Saturday by supporters of the law, including State Senator Russell Pearce, a Republican who sponsored it and who predicted that the injunction would be lifted.
Mayor Phil Gordon, a Democrat who opposed the new law, took it all in with a measure of resignation.
“They are trying to get on TV, both extremes,” he said. “Nothing is going to change until we revise the immigration system.”
But Congressional efforts to provide some legal status to the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the country and perhaps put in place a program to allow more immigrants in to work, appear stalled.
Overall crime is declining in the state, and the Obama administration, responding to calls from Republicans and members of his own party, is sending reinforcements to the border, including about 1,200 National Guard troops, the first of whom are expected to arrive in the coming weeks.
And several police agencies in Arizona already had agreements with the federal government, and training, to help enforce immigration law under certain conditions.
But Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican seeking election to a full term, has said the problems and costs associated with illegal immigration remain dire, and she pressed the point in asking the appeals court for a review of Judge Bolton’s ruling.
Her lawyers, asking the court to make the case a priority, said the law sought to “address the irreparable harm Arizona is suffering as a result of unchecked unlawful immigration.”
The law, they said, is “critical to address serious criminal, environmental problems Arizona has been suffering as a consequence of illegal immigration and the lack of effective enforcement activity by the federal government.”
Under the schedule proposed by the lawyers for the state, the court would hear oral arguments in September; a Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment and the federal government did not file an immediate response in court.
There was still some question about what effect the remaining sections of the law that Judge Bolton did not block might have.
For now, at least, the police will not be required to check the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants whom they stop or arrest for other offenses. Nor will immigrants without proper papers face state misdemeanor charges.
Those provisions of the law, said one advocate for immigrants, the Rev. Glenn B. Jenks, an Episcopal priest in Tempe who was formerly a lawyer, were the “teeth” that “are driving people out of the state,” as the law’s proponents intended.
But some church and labor leaders said they were concerned about several provisions Judge Bolton did not suspend.
Although the judge blocked a broad section of the law that would have made it a crime for an illegal immigrant to solicit work in Arizona, it is now a crime to stop a car in the street to pick up a day laborer.
Also, police officers were given new powers to impound vehicles used to transport illegal immigrants. While that provision appeared to be aimed at migrant smugglers, some advocates worried that the police would apply it to church groups and others transporting immigrants in vans.
The ruling, said the Rev. Trina Zelle, a Presbyterian minister in Arizona who is executive director of the Arizona Interfaith Alliance for Worker Justice, a labor advocacy group, “is a partial and brief respite, and until the law is completely struck down it will be subject to abuse.”
Randal C. Archibold reported from Phoenix. Julia Preston contributed reporting from New York, and Ana Facio Contreras in Phoenix.
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
PHOENIX — As the Arizona governor on Thursday formally appealed a federal judge’s ruling that prevented the most contested parts of the state’s immigration law from taking effect, a burst of protest and recrimination made clear the ruling had hardly soothed emotions in the state.
The new law technically went into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, but major provisions of it, including one giving police officers a larger role in enforcing immigration violations, were suspended Wednesday by the court order.
Judge Susan R. Bolton of Federal District Court, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the Obama administration, said the provisions should be halted until there could be a trial on whether they would interfere with federal authority on immigration and subject legal residents to unwarranted scrutiny.
The parts of the law that were suspended called for police officers to check a person’s immigration status, when they were suspicious of it, while enforcing other laws and required immigrants to prove that they were authorized to be in the country.
The United States Marshals Service here said Judge Bolton received death threats on Thursday, as anger flamed unabated on both sides of the controversy and protesters took to the streets.
One prominent opponent of illegal immigration, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, who patrols metropolitan Phoenix and administers the jails, said he was continuing with his duties.
“It’s business as normal,” Sheriff Arpaio said as he announced the beginning of another of his controversial crime sweeps — which inevitably lead to the arrests of illegal immigrants on state smuggling charges and are unaffected by the court order.
About the same time Sheriff Arpaio made the remark, his deputies and the police a few miles away were busy arresting some 30 people who blocked downtown streets and one of his jails or were accused of refusing to follow police orders during a march by hundreds of people against the law.
“I’m here because the injunction is temporary and it can be overturned,” said Kirk Snow, 43, one of the protesters.
A rally is planned for Saturday by supporters of the law, including State Senator Russell Pearce, a Republican who sponsored it and who predicted that the injunction would be lifted.
Mayor Phil Gordon, a Democrat who opposed the new law, took it all in with a measure of resignation.
“They are trying to get on TV, both extremes,” he said. “Nothing is going to change until we revise the immigration system.”
But Congressional efforts to provide some legal status to the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the country and perhaps put in place a program to allow more immigrants in to work, appear stalled.
Overall crime is declining in the state, and the Obama administration, responding to calls from Republicans and members of his own party, is sending reinforcements to the border, including about 1,200 National Guard troops, the first of whom are expected to arrive in the coming weeks.
And several police agencies in Arizona already had agreements with the federal government, and training, to help enforce immigration law under certain conditions.
But Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican seeking election to a full term, has said the problems and costs associated with illegal immigration remain dire, and she pressed the point in asking the appeals court for a review of Judge Bolton’s ruling.
Her lawyers, asking the court to make the case a priority, said the law sought to “address the irreparable harm Arizona is suffering as a result of unchecked unlawful immigration.”
The law, they said, is “critical to address serious criminal, environmental problems Arizona has been suffering as a consequence of illegal immigration and the lack of effective enforcement activity by the federal government.”
Under the schedule proposed by the lawyers for the state, the court would hear oral arguments in September; a Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment and the federal government did not file an immediate response in court.
There was still some question about what effect the remaining sections of the law that Judge Bolton did not block might have.
For now, at least, the police will not be required to check the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants whom they stop or arrest for other offenses. Nor will immigrants without proper papers face state misdemeanor charges.
Those provisions of the law, said one advocate for immigrants, the Rev. Glenn B. Jenks, an Episcopal priest in Tempe who was formerly a lawyer, were the “teeth” that “are driving people out of the state,” as the law’s proponents intended.
But some church and labor leaders said they were concerned about several provisions Judge Bolton did not suspend.
Although the judge blocked a broad section of the law that would have made it a crime for an illegal immigrant to solicit work in Arizona, it is now a crime to stop a car in the street to pick up a day laborer.
Also, police officers were given new powers to impound vehicles used to transport illegal immigrants. While that provision appeared to be aimed at migrant smugglers, some advocates worried that the police would apply it to church groups and others transporting immigrants in vans.
The ruling, said the Rev. Trina Zelle, a Presbyterian minister in Arizona who is executive director of the Arizona Interfaith Alliance for Worker Justice, a labor advocacy group, “is a partial and brief respite, and until the law is completely struck down it will be subject to abuse.”
Randal C. Archibold reported from Phoenix. Julia Preston contributed reporting from New York, and Ana Facio Contreras in Phoenix.
