Appeals court reverses ban on Sheriff Joe Arpaio workplace raids

[lostinblue 1,989]

Appeals court reverses ban on Sheriff Joe Arpaio workplace raids

A federal appeals court has lifted a judge's ruling that effectively blocked Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio from conducting his controversial workplace raids.

Monday’s decision from a panel of judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses a preliminary injunction issued last year by U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell. Campbell is presiding over a class-action lawsuit against Arpaio, County Attorney Bill Montgomery and the state of Arizona.

It is unclear how the ruling will affect day-to-day operations of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. Arpaio said Monday that he was talking with his attorneys about the next steps.

"I'm happy with the decision," he said. "I’m looking at all the options."

The underlying lawsuit, filed by Puente Arizona and other civil-rights advocates, challenges the merits of two state laws that make it a felony for undocumented immigrants to use stolen identities to obtain work.

Arpaio had announced he was disbanding his work-site identity-theft enforcement unit before the preliminary injunction. During the unit's existence, it conducted an estimated 83 operations, arresting more than 780 people. The operations drew criticism for overwhelmingly targeting low-level employees at businesses such as restaurants and car washes, rather than their employers.

The plaintiffs said the laws were less about public safety and instead designed to work as a deportation machine. In this vein, they said, the state laws were pre-empted by federal immigration rules.

Campbell’s January 2015 ruling tended to agree, and said the laws likely would be found unconstitutional. His injunction barred Arpaio’s deputies from executing their workplace raids and Montgomery’s office from using the laws to prosecute.

Monday's opinion, issued by Senior District Judge Robert S. Lasnik and Circuit Judges Barry G. Silverman and Richard C. Tallman, acknowledged that while some applications of the laws may conflict with the federal government, this wasn't the case when they were used to prosecute U.S. citizens.

“These bills were passed, at least in part, in an effort to solve some of Arizona’s problems stemming from illegal immigration,” the opinion stated. “But these bills were also aimed at curbing the growing and well-documented problem of identity theft in Arizona.”

The case has been sent back to the lower U.S. District Court for review.

"The harm to society and individuals, is still real, and it's still there," said Deputy Chief Jack MacIntyre. "With the preliminary injunction being lifted, it’s still an issue that probably needs to be addressed by law enforcement, including the prosecuting arm of the state." Officials from Arpaio's office said the lawman has not yet decided whether to resurrect the ID-theft enforcement unit.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys said the injunction would remain in place for at least 21 more days. And if Arpaio does opt to reinstate the unit, he first would have to check with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Last year, Arpaio’s attorneys reached a settlement agreement with the DOJ over a racial-profiling lawsuit that, in part, covered workplace raids. According to the agreement, Arpaio must provide the DOJ with draft policies and protocols before resuming any workplace operation that targets three or more suspects.

A statement issued by Montgomery's office on Monday said the injunction had prevented the prosecution of those accused of stealing identities, "leaving hundreds of identity theft victims unprotected."

“Today’s ruling should make clear that categorical attacks on Arizona laws that have a tangential relationship at best to an individual’s immigration status will not find welcome even at the Ninth Circuit,” Montgomery said in the statement. “We believe our identity theft laws are fairly applied, protect Arizona victims of identity theft, and do not intrude on the federal immigration system and we look forward to the opportunity to now make that case at trial.”

Campbell's injunction had prompted the dismissal of more than 200 identity-theft cases. County Attorney spokesman Jerry Cobb said prosecutors would review the dismissed cases but said prosecution “may be difficult in instances where a defendant or victim has left the jurisdiction.”

It’s a setback, but we think we will prevail," said Jessica Vosburgh, a staff attorney for National Day Laborer Organizing Network. "We are considering a number of different options going forward."

Plaintiffs' attorneys said they disagreed with the legal analysis that the panel used to come to its decision.

Vosburgh said plaintiffs may seek a rehearing of Monday’s decision.

In a statement, Puente Arizona Organizing Director Francisca Porchas called the laws "cruel, unjust and degrading."

"We knew that it would be a long court battle, but after years of raids, and hundreds of immigrants arrested, we also know the importance of continuing the fight," she said. "In the meantime, we will also continue to open our doors to those in the community affected by the raids.”

Although the underlying suit challenges the laws themselves, it names Arpaio and Montgomery as defendants, arguing that they used the laws less for law enforcement and more as a deportation machine.

Attorneys representing immigrant-rights group Puente, the American Civil Liberties Union and several other plaintiffs issued the motion for a preliminary injunction shortly after filing a class-action lawsuit in June 2014. That suit seeks to eliminate the last legal footing Arpaio had to conduct his own brand of immigration enforcement using workplace raids.

The ID-theft provisions were enacted as part of an attempt by lawmakers to crack down on employers of undocumented workers under the 2007 Legal Arizona Workers Act.

Under federal law, workers are required to show employers identification proving they are authorized to work legally in the U.S. Undocumented immigrants, however, often used documents with invented, borrowed or stolen Social Security numbers to get jobs.

The Arizona law made it a felony to use ID theft to gain employment, even in cases where the worker was using fictitious names with invented Social Security numbers that belonged to no one.

After the law was passed, Arpaio, and former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, used the ID-theft provisions as legal backing to conduct the raids.

Montgomery continued the practice of prosecuting undocumented workers for ID theft after taking office in November 2010.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2016/05/02/appeals-court-reverses-ban-arpaio-workplace-raids/83835390/

[TBoneTX 45,536]

This sounds like a complex issue, with valid points on both sides.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Love me some Sheriff Joe