Justice Department fights S.C. immigration law

The Justice Department is asking a federal court to stop enforcement of parts of South Carolina's new immigration law, bringing to three the number of states the Obama administration is suing over immigration crackdowns.

The government earlier this year challenged Alabama's new law. And we're waiting to see if the Supreme Court takes up the challenge to the Arizona law.

The Justice Department action, filed Monday in federal court in Charleston, is directed at parts of the new South Carolina law that, for example:

-require police to determine immigration status during any lawful stop, detention, investigation, or arrest by the where there is "reasonable suspicion" that an individual is unlawfully present,

-allow state residents to sue any local government agency that moves to limit enforcement of state immigration laws,

-and create a new state crime of "allowing oneself to be transported" for the purpose of harboring someone here illegally or concealing a person's immigration status.

"By pursuing retribution and ignoring every other objective embodied in the federal immigration system (including the federal government's prioritization of the removal of criminal aliens)," the Justice Department said, the South Carolina law "conflicts with and otherwise stands as an obstacle to Congress's demand for sufficient flexibility in the enforcement of federal immigration law to accommodate the competing interests of immigration control, national security and public safety, humanitarian concerns, and foreign relations."

Discuss this post

Is Holder going to go to South Carolina and campaign against the state for enacting a law to protect it's citizens like he did in Alabama.

Isn't what Holder did in Alabama jury tampering? When does an attorney general go out and speak publicly about investigations the way he does?

This administration is just a huge embarassment!

  • 12 votes
#1 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:03 PM EDT

"This administration is just a huge embarassment!"

Well, looky here. ANOHER "I hate Obama" post from Rob in ma. Geez- where have I seen this before?

  • 9 votes
#1.1 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:12 PM EDT

Isn't what Holder did in Alabama jury tampering? When does an attorney general go out and speak publicly about investigations the way he does?

Well, you seem to believe it's "jury tampering" so, please, by all means, expound.

  • 4 votes
#1.2 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:14 PM EDT

Then come on Drive By -give us your take on this little issue.

You support the states right to address the problem, particularly given that the feds are doing such a bad job?

You like illegal immigration?

How many legal immigrants are admitted to this country every year? At what cost to them?

Would you advocate for the legal immigrants, who are in line, to simply come on in illegally?

Say - you got a Roberto's Taco Shop on every corner yet? Don't worry amigo, you will. Not in Alabama, but certainly in Iowa.

  • 12 votes
#1.3 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:16 PM EDT

Spank- there's something like 12 MILLION of 'em here. Been here quite a while, too.

You think ONLY libs looked the other way when they snuck in, I bet.

But wait- libs don't create landscape and roofing jobs, RICH PEOPLE do!

BUT- now that the spotlight is on these illegals, the righties want to 'send 'em home'. Aren't they kind of hard to get rid of now, after the people that hired them all looked the other way for so long? You know- kind of like creating an 'implied waiver' to their being here illegally?

  • 10 votes
#1.4 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:21 PM EDT

There are plenty of LEGAL roofers and landscapers. Plus you get rid of the cheaters - the ones working under the table and not paying taxes and wages will go up. There are 14 million unemployed people who need jobs, so why are protecting criminals?

Plus I know you saw that report out of Mass. last Friday. Seems the great state os Mass. spent $91 million providing free health care to illegals.

Also Alabama has your 'implied waiver' argument firmly in hand. They are cracking down and the illegals are self deporting.

What's the down side to strict enforcement? Every time a cop pulls you over he asks for id. If you don't have it should they just let you go?

We have laws for a reason Drive By.

  • 12 votes
#1.5 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:29 PM EDT

Spankers, you are aware, of course, that the US Customs and Border Patrol employs more agents now than it ever has before in its entire history, yes?

www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/286/secure-the-borders/

  • 3 votes
#1.6 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:35 PM EDT

Also, the Pres is actually in trouble w/ hispanics because more have been deported in these 3 years than ever in a similar period. I know they don't confuse you too much w/ facts over on Fox.

  • 5 votes
#1.7 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:41 PM EDT

I sure do Noid, just as yo are no doubt aware there are more illegals here now than ever.

So what's your point?

You are not pro-illegal immigration are you?

How about that Mass. report - $91 million spent on free health care for illegals. You good with that Noid? Might you Rather that go to actual citizens?

I don't suppose you have ever had to get treatment in Mexico? They make you pay up front, or no dice.

  • 8 votes
#1.8 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:45 PM EDT

What is wrong with the Obama administration?

Suing state after state after state, declaring Dream Act for practical purposes by executive fiat, selling assault rifles to Mexican cartels …….

Jesus E. Diaz Jr. was recently sentenced to two years in prison. Diaz is a border patrol agent who had been named in an indictment stemming from an October 2008, 2 AM arrest near Eagle Pass, Texas.

He allegedly used excessive force in lifting the arms of a drug smuggler in an effort to force him to the ground. (The smuggler was resisting arrest.) Diaz then allegedly put his knee in the suspect’s back and yanked on the handcuffs.

The suspect complained of soreness in his shoulders, but the only marks were from strap marks – the straps of his backpack which he was lugging the 75 lbs. of dope for hours.

The case was initially investigated by Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Office of Professional Responsibility – Diaz was cleared by both.

A year later, Internal Affairs Division at US Customs and Border Protection, after receiving pressure from the Mexican government, brought charges.

The smuggler was given immunity – went free – and Diaz, doing his job trying to protect America is going to the slammer for 2 years.

The government is literally giving cartels guns to kill border agents and sending agents to jail and …. Leaving borders virtually open even after an Iranian terrorist threat involving cartels …..All for desperate chance to get re-elected?

This guy has no conscious.

  • 11 votes
#1.9 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:45 PM EDT

Spankeroo,

You wanna get serious about protecting the border? Fine...I'm game. Deal with that first and then you'll have the credibility necessary to begin dealing with those who are here.

If you're boat was sinking wouldn't you plug the leak first and then start bailing out all the water?

How about that Mass. report - $91 million spent on free health care for illegals. You good with that Noid?

Wait, let me guess...let 'em die, right?

  • 5 votes
#1.10 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:05 PM EDT

So make it manadatory to use E-Verify (contrary to California which just outlawed making E-verify mandatory) and enforce the existing immigration laws. Deport all those that are here illegally (not just the violent ones..). By making using E-verify and by having strong penalities to companies to those that choose to hire illegals, you will lower the reward that businesses gain from using illegal labor.

  • 7 votes
#1.11 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:22 PM EDT

Southern states like Alabama and South Carolina hate Mexicans. Even though, since slavery is illegal, they love the cheap labor. Can't have it both ways. They all know Obama has done a better job than any previous president at sending home illegals yet they want to make a point. Whats the point? We don't want no Mexicans in our land. We're too lazy to work our land without cheap labor. Please give up free labor by way of criminal free labor or slavery. And since our police racially profile constantly you know where this is going . . .

  • 4 votes
#1.12 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:37 PM EDT

@bob-1805084

Did you see the video on Border patrol agent Jesus Diaz? If you didn't ( and I didn't either ) I want to let you know that police have a history of excessive force.

Rodney Kings a$$-whipping only came to light because of a camera, otherwise it was another day on the job ....

Want to get serious about illegal immigrants? Put the JOB CREATORS in jail when they hire them or fine them tons of money... oh oh....can't do that can we?

@Spanky: I thought the great State of MAss had free healthcare for all.....what gives?

  • 4 votes
#1.13 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:38 PM EDT

Let them die?

Seriously Noid, that's just silly. Like your plugging the hole analogy.

These states Obama hates so much - South Carolina and Alabama have it right. Take away the incentives and they leave. If they we not in Mass, but rather in Mexico, then Mass. would have $91 million more to spend on it's own people.

Just think of all the money Cali would have for health care, education and everything else. We are now going to start seeing the true costs of these criminals.

and it is huge, whereas our resources are limited.

Right Noid? Of course.

It's like the fine folk in the OWS are finding out - scare resources is a bitch. Free food and tents and sleeping bags, but not for everyone. Only the ones they choose.

But then you know that - you have a house, with a lock on the door. Noid - you like to control who comes into your house. How come?

  • 7 votes
#1.14 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:39 PM EDT

Actually, Ana, I am not sure where this is going. What I am sure about is you make some rather sweeping, generalized assumptions about the viewpoints and attitudes of the people of the South. Factual backup?

  • 3 votes
#1.15 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:42 PM EDT

Awww, Spanky...still babbling about nothing again, I see...so "holier than thou"...

  • 1 vote
#1.16 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:15 PM EDT

Anyone planning on mentioned the shortage of seasonal field workers in Alabama? 15,000 migrant workers fled the state and now crops are rotting in the fields.

Looks like Americans are passing on back breaking jobs where workers are in the heat for long hours. Go figure.

Crops are rotting in the fields because farmers can't find enough workers to harvest them. Even legal immigrants are not showing up for jobs at construction sites and poultry plants because, agriculture and industry officials say, they fear a hostile state climate.

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/10/alabama_lawmakers_getting_pres.html

  • 4 votes
#1.17 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:19 PM EDT

wtf! these aren't already laws? whats wrong with proving citizenship or visa status. ..And well if the fields are rotting maybe the farmers will hire american workers for an american wage, and if they can't they don't need to be in business IN AMERICA!!! THey can move to france china africa or mexico . right?

  • 1 vote
#1.18 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:06 PM EDT

You want Americans farmers to outsource to countries with cheaper labor yea that sounds like a solution wtf are u smoking?

    #1.19 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:17 AM EDT

    So we have unemployment at 9% and real unemployment much higher. Riddle me this. Do you think wages go up or down if you have 10m+ illegals in the workforce.

    Why does the left hate the working poor? If there were no illegals and nobody to pick their crop would farmers

    a) Let the crop rot and go out of business

    b) Offer higher wages until enough people were picking the crop and pass the cost along to the consumer.

      #1.20 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:37 PM EST
      Reply

      Stopping the states from doing the work the Feds ought to be doing.

      Sounds like another winning strategy from Holder.

      Must be about time for some Obama pandering. Election is around the corner so Obama needs to tell the Latinos that he is all about getting comprehensive immigration reform.

      Interestingly, it seems that many in the immigrant community are disgusted in the overt pandering.

      Keep up the good work Holder. Americans love illegal immigration and have little desire for the borders to actually be secured.

      Oh wait, in fact it is the opposite.

      Anyone here actually support illegal immigration?

      Yeah, I didn't think so.

      • 6 votes
      Reply#2 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:12 PM EDT

      - Americans love illegal immigration and have little desire for the borders to actually be secured.

      Spanky, I think you hit the nail on the head. In reality the cry to "secure the borders" is utterly absurd. As long as the disparity in conditions between the US and countries south continue to exist no wall and no amount of border patrol will ever stop the northward flow of people. If we were serious about stopping illegal immigration we would eliminate the conditions that make said migration attractive. The brunt of the end of undocumented workers would be borne by consumers as prices, especially food prices, would increase significantly.

      We gotta look like we are doing something, so yell, scream, arrest a few of 'em, pass laws, point fingers, built fences, etc, but for christsakes make sure enough of 'em stick around so I don't have to pay too much for a head of lettuce.

      • 3 votes
      #2.1 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:57 PM EDT
      Reply

      Good, glad to see the DOJ doing their job. Common sense tells one that the AZ, SC and other laws are merely fronts to make it seem as if they are doing something. The Federal Congress has yet to address immigration reform. If it were such a huge problem, why then did the GOP throw Bush and McCain under the bus and refuse to resolve it. Why is the GOP unwilling to take action today. There are plenty of democrats willing to help. The best way to fix the border illegal problem is to reform our laws first.

      The police's job should not be to check someone's immigration status. The SC law is another that will have American citizens stopped, questioned and perhaps taken to jail because they don't have their "papers" with them. This law and others like it are nothing more than a tool for republicans to use against miniorities while claiming they are trying to do the Federal Governments job.

      President Obama has deported more illegals and sought legal action against more companies hiring illegals in his 2 plus years than Bush did in 8.

      • 7 votes
      Reply#3 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:32 PM EDT

      Ok Jody - how does it work then?

      Cops pull you over. What is the first thing they ask for?

      I drive to Az. I go through 3 check points. What is the first thing they ask?

      So Jody, cops pull over an illegal for a traffic violation. The illegal has no id. What should they do then?

      In fact Jody are you advocating that none of us carry id, or does your assertion only go to protect the illegals?

      Obama may have deported a bunch, but there are 20 million still here. They drain our resources. They need to go. The laws must be upheld. There are millions of legal immigrants trying to get here. Why give the advantage to the law breakers?

      And of course every single one commits multiple crimes every day. You good with that Jody? You have no issue with ID theft, driving without a license or insurance, tax evasion?

      Jody - do we all just get to pick and choose which laws we don't want to obey? I'd like to start with the IRC. How about you?

      • 8 votes
      #3.1 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:52 PM EDT

      The point is that the states are usurping the powers of the Federal government.

      International affairs are the province of the federal not the state governments. Laws like those in Arizona, Alabama and South Carolina are simply moving people around, making it harder to deal with the problem.

      If one is to condone individual state actions, we cease to be the "United" States.

      I'm not for illegal entry into this country. I am for enforcing the laws. Some of these "laws" however will adversely affect those of us who ARE here legally. Leaving interpretations like this up to local law enforcement is an abridgement of OUR rights.

      • 2 votes
      #3.2 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:37 PM EDT

      So fielden - how does a state trooper positively id a suspect?

      By asking for ID. So when the illegal cannot produce a valid id, but rather only has a Mexican Consulate id, what is the trooper to do?

      Let them go?

      Plus the states have to be able to protect their own. The feds are not doing even a passable job.

      So the last time you got pulled over, did the cop demand ID? Did that abridge your rights?

      Of course it didn't.

      There is no defense for illegal immigration. Plenty of legal immigrants want to be here, play by the rules, yet the illegals do not and are here, breaking our lwas everyday.

      plus we get to pay for them. Nice, right?

      • 4 votes
      #3.3 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:44 PM EDT

      Spanky, I agree with you. When a trooper stops a person for a violation and they cannot produce a license or an ID relating to the violation, they should not be let go.

      But go back and read the law quoted in the article. "Reasonable suspicion" goes beyond simple breaking of the law. This is the kind of thing that America fought with segregation laws. I don't want to go back to that. This is the kind of thing Europe endured in the last century. I don't want to go there either.

      If the only criteria being used is that there is "suspiscion" that I may be illegal, then yes, that is abridging my rights.

      And I still contend this is a Federal issue, not a state issue.

      • 3 votes
      #3.4 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:50 PM EDT

      While I agree that the Federal government has authority over immigration, at the same time they are abandoning their responsibility and burdening the states with the cost of their inaction. California spends MILLIONS of dollars annually to house, feed, cloth, provide education (both elementary and now college) and medical care and to also incarcerate illegals that the federal government does not pay back to the state. So what are the states supposed to do? While I commend the president for playing a more active role in immigration it still doesn't address the lopsided arrangement that the federal government places on the states.

      • 2 votes
      #3.5 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:17 PM EDT

      [They drain our resources.]

      That's the biggest load of crap from you yet, Jr...nice try...typical B.S. talking point.

      • 3 votes
      #3.6 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:18 PM EDT

      That is the standard police use to detain.

      The Federal Gov. started a program, the 187 [?] program that has the feds working with various participating states to enforce immigration.

      See out here in progressive paradise we, like every where have DUI check points. Thing is, on a given day there are a 100 impounds. typically less than 10 are DUI. The vast majority is for immigration - no id, no registration, no insurance.

      And as you can imagine the pro illegal people are calling to end DUI check points. Not fair to the illegals.

      Unbelievable. Wonder what MADD thinks?

      Call me old fashion but if you are illegal and driving around my town, I want you arrested, deported and the car impounded and sold. That money can go to the benevolent cops society for all I care.

      but then again, I have been hit by an illegal -no insurance, no registration, and of course no license.

      Again, if you don't already - max out your uninsured motorist coverage, Illegals, without insurance are all over the place.

      • 7 votes
      #3.7 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:26 PM EDT

      How many times have you been pulled over in your lifetime Spanky? Ten? My father is African American (just found out my father's grandmother is of Nigerian descent) and my mother is South Vietnamese.

      How many times have I been pulled over just so a police officer can "check me out" for no reason other than I am out late at night, registration expired, license plate LIGHT is out, or the most BS reason of NOT SIGNALING WITHIN 100 FEET of a LANE CHANGE.

      How many times SPANKY do you veer into the right lane when turning left at an intersection?

      You must stay in the left late or you will get pulled over... that is... if your skin is a lil more tan than "unsuspicious" people like a nice old lady in a 2002 Buick Park Avenue.....

      60-70 traffic stops over my lifespan of 35 yeras. Granted some were legit citations such as for speeding but the majority have been for BS reasons where in the end they LET ME be on my way. Do not take your "unsuspicious" ethnic background for granted.

      • 2 votes
      #3.8 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:32 PM EDT
      Reply

      Do any of you people stop and think... who pays all the taxes? If you cut down the number of people contributing ..the services you all enjoy and look for to in your old age are all eliminated !

      • 2 votes
      Reply#4 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:33 PM EDT

      -and create a new state crime of "allowing oneself to be transported" for the purpose of harboring someone here illegally or concealing a person's immigration status.

      Now, in English, can someone please explain to me what that is even supposed to mean?

      • 3 votes
      Reply#5 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:39 PM EDT

      Driving without a drivers license isn't a jailable offense. The police normally increase the cost of the ticket for that.  Just because I don't have my license with me doesn't mean Im illegal.

      My son (17 years old) forgets his wallet and license at home all the time. I suspect that if he is ever stopped by the cops and docked $100 for that, he will learn his leasson.

      But you don't have to deport him for being stupid

      What surprises me more is how many of these laws ARE NOT challenged by the State Supreme Courts. This should give you an indication of how political the justice system has become as only the Federal Justice System seesm to stand up and say "that may not be fair"

      Good luck to all of us if we end up on the wrong side of the law

      • 3 votes
      Reply#6 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 6:31 PM EDT

      Pablo,

      This will be a great learning oppurtunity for your son. He will realize some cosequences for forgetting his wallet and driver's license "All The Time". A hefty fine leveled at your son's father every time your son is caught driving without his license will surely be an equally great learning oppurtunity for the two of you. Father/son bonding. LOL

      • 3 votes
      Reply#7 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:09 PM EDT

      If you are cited for driving without proof of license you can just show up at court, show the judge you had a valid license at the time of citation and they will drop the charge.

      Cops can verify any has a valid license if correct identification information is provided during the traffic stop. Unfortunately if the cop thinks someone is "illegal" or suspicious of being illegal they will haul you downtown until proof of citizenship is provided by the accused's family member or friend.

      http://www.azfamily.com/news/91769419.html

      Father/son bonding hyuck hyuck good one Joe! *cough* dick

        #7.1 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:11 PM EDT

        Adidas: I think your complaint, while valid (concerning police abusing their authority) is irrelevant to the policing of our borders. South Carolina has had to enact 3 tough but effective laws in my opinion.
        The larger issue, (the likes of which I cannot ever recall seeing in my lifetime), is the federal government not only refusing to enforce the federal immigration laws, but suing states that attempt to enforce those same laws.

        • 2 votes
        #7.2 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 4:12 AM EDT
        Reply

        Papers where are your papers? work will set you free. Seems we seen this some place else in history.

        • 1 vote
        Reply#8 - Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:35 PM EDT

        Where are all those two for a penny judges, you know the ones when you vote on something ,They say even though the majority voted to pass this I'm going to invoke an injunction and stop This or that .where is the federal judge that will tell eric holder and the white house you will start enforceing the constitution of the united states.All of you judge don't stand up all at one time now.

          Reply#9 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 2:08 AM EDT

          IT REALLY IS AMAZING how when the states try improve their enforcement of the federal illegally being in America laws ,The Obama administration sues them

          MAKES ONE WONDER about who's money is going into Obama's pockets or has already gone into his pockets ,like who does he owe

          • 2 votes
          Reply#10 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 6:33 AM EDT

          Does every state have to allow illegals all the rights of a US citizen? I should hope not. I would think We the Taxpayers could put up boundaries for the illegals and keep them within them. I see no good reason to force the taxpayers from everywhere to support these people. If SC does not want illegals in the state, good for them, illegals should go elsewhere, or go back where they came from.

          • 1 vote
          Reply#11 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:25 AM EDT

          Interesting reading.  I am a cop, my second career choice after serving our great country for 21 years.  I see and read many concerns regarding the issue of illegal immigration.  I agree we need to do something about it as it is stressing many states financially in a lot of different ways.  My view of this is not just the issue of the Federal Government, it's all OUR issue no matter what skin color we have, or what ethnic background we come from.  It's affecting all of us as a country.  There's no easy answer but I do know this; if "we" as a country do not come up with an answer, this problem will continue to escalate.  More and more crime, more time and money taken from our education and health care systems.  Do anyone of you like the idea of being a tax payer and taking on that burden?  I don't!

            Reply#12 - Tue Nov 1, 2011 9:43 PM EDT

            Mark, thanks for posting. Although I sound outraged it was more because of Spanky's smug demeanor that irked me not that I have a grudge against law enforcement. Many of my "police encounters" were awesome. Cops were soooooooooo cool haha if you know what I mean. Once 4 Oregon State Troopers let me go and stated that they "werent city cops" of which I assume means higher jurisdiction equals big fish only? (not implying I was ever a small fish)

              #12.1 - Wed Nov 2, 2011 3:03 AM EDT
              Reply
              You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
              As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.