Alabama asks U.S. Supreme Court to hear arguments on part of state`s immigration law

Monday`s filing was not immediately available and was provided to al.com this morning by the Alabama Attorney General`s office.

The Alabama Attorney General`s office declined this morning to comment on the filing, as did Governor Robert Bentley`s office.

The state did not ask the court to reconsider other parts of Alabama`s far-reaching immigration law that have been blocked by the courts as part of a lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice.

A provision in the law that asked new public school students to provide immigration status information was also blocked, but in a separate lawsuit. The state has until late February to file a request asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider that section of the law. That issue was raised in a lawsuit brought by a group of 36 plaintiffs, led by the Hispanic Coalition of Alabama. 

Mary Bauer, legal director for the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is among the groups representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, reacted the state`s filing.

“We are deeply disappointed by the state`s continued efforts to defend this immoral and reprehensible anti-immigrant law,” Bauer said. “Despite the fact that our state has suffered incredible economic and humanitarian costs over the past two years as a result of HB56, Governor Bentley has chosen to continue defending it, and now asks the Supreme Court to sanction the provision that would criminalize the act of giving a ride or shelter to one`s neighbor.

“The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sent a strong message last summer when it blocked this provision; we are confident the Supreme Court will agree.”

Alabama argues in its latest filing that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which blocked the harboring section of the law in an August ruling, erred in finding that federal law already addresses the issues of harboring, transporting and encouraging illegal immigrants to enter or live in the U.S.

The harboring provision was denounced by three large Alabama churches, when the state`s immigration law was passed in 2011. Leaders of the state`s Episcopal, Roman Catholic and United Methodist churches filed a lawsuit seeking to block the measure, arguing it would criminalize ministering to some in their congregations.

The measure was blocked at the district court and appeals court levels, chiefly due to what the court found were parallels to federal law.

Alabama`s filing requesting to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court disputes those findings and argues that 10 other states have adopted similar measures and the question needs to be taken up by the high court to resolve confusion.

“The Eleventh Circuit did not send Alabama and other States back to the drawing board for another try, giving them an opportunity to tailor the provisions more narrowly to address some limited concern,” Alabama argues in the filing`s conclusion. “The court instead held that States simply lack the power to regulate their citizens` conduct in this important field. The Eleventh Circuit was wrong, and States should have this power. But whether they do or not, they deserve to know now, rather than having to wait for years of costly, controversial litigation to provide a definitive answer.

“Just as these considerations warranted immediate review in Arizona, they warrant closing the loop on these issues here.”

Ir a la nota fuente