Those of you who want go delve into the finer points of law regarding United States District Judge Susan Bolton’s ruling of July 28, 2010, in the matter of U.S. vs. State of Arizona that stays the enforcement of parts of Arizona’s illegal immigration law known as SB 1070, should read the entire 36 page Order. Here are some of the Judge’s ending remarks:
“If enforcement of the portions of S.B. 1070 for which the Court finds a likelihood of preemption is not enjoined, the United States is likely to suffer irreparable harm. This is so because the federal government’s ability to enforce its policies and achieve its objectives will be undermined by the state’s enforcement of statutes that interfere with federal law, even if the Court were to conclude that the state statutes have substantially the same goals as federal law. . . . The Court thus finds a likelihood of irreparable harm to the interests of the United States that warrants preliminary injunctive relief.”
. . .
“If Arizona were to enforce the portions of S.B. 1070 for which the Court has found a likelihood of preemption, such enforcement would likely burden legal resident aliens and interfere with federal policy. A preliminary injunction would allow the federal government to continue to pursue federal priorities, which is inherently in the public interest, until a final judgment is reached in this case.”
. . .
“The Court therefore finds that preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely preempted by federal law to be enforced.”