Reps from Florida take positions on Arizona’s immigration enforcement law
In the ongoing legal battle over Arizona’s S.B. 1070 immigration enforcement law, which will be taken up by the Supreme Court later this month, members of Florida’s congressional delegation have signed court briefs on both sides of the issue.
While two Florida Democrats have signed on to oppose Arizona’s law, three Florida Republicans signed a brief supporting the measure, which has served as a model for other states and brought to the forefront questions about how states can enforce existing federal immigration laws.
Florida Republicans Jeff Miller, Dennis Ross and Cliff Stearns signed an amicus brief supporting S.B.1070 (.pdf) filed with the Supreme Court.
The Immigration Reform Law Institute filed the brief (.pdf) along with the American Center for Law and Justice to “jointly represent fifty-five Members of Congress and two United States Senators.” The Committee to Protect America’s Border has also signed the brief.
According to the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a second brief was filed by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach on behalf of the Secure States Initiative. Kobach is an immigration advisor to GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, endorsed last month by Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.
Sunshine State News reported Wednesday that “Reps. Ted Deutch, D-Boca Raton, and Frederica Wilson, D-Miami, signed an amicus brief with 65 other members of Congress — all Democrats — to support the Justice Department’s opposition to the law.”
Deutch and Wilson “joined 11 state attorneys general — also all Democrats — in contending that Arizona’s SB 1070 will “have the primary effect of redirecting undocumented immigrants to other states,” Sunshine State News added.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments about Arizona’s immigration enforcement law, immigrant advocates, civil rights activists and other organization have issued documents and filed briefs opposing the state’s law.
Soon after its passage in April 2010, the Obama administration challenged the constitutionality of the measure. In July 2010 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th District upheld an injunction that blocked several provisions contained in the law, which prompted Arizona authorities to petition the Supreme Court.