EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Judge Blocks Parts of South Carolina Immigration Law
CHARLESTON, SC - South Carolina is barred from enforcing several key parts of its new law aimed at curbing illegal immigration, a federal judge ruled on Thursday, making the state the latest to see such efforts halted by the courts.
South Carolina is among states that have enacted tough laws against illegal immigration in the past two years, citing inaction by the federal government that has left a void in immigration policy. But federal judges have consistently blocked the attempts, halting key parts of other immigration laws passed in Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Utah and Indiana. (Image courtesy of America's Voice Online) U.S. District Judge Richard Gergel temporarily blocked parts of South Carolina's measure. He ruled the federal government has exclusive constitutional authority to regulate immigration and the state's law would disrupt federal enforcement operations.
The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of civil rights groups had sued to keep some aspects of the law from going into effect on January 1.
The judge said South Carolina could not require police officers to check the immigration status of a person they stop for even a minor traffic violation if they have "reasonable suspicion" that the person is in the country illegally.
This "state-mandated scrutiny is without consideration of federal enforcement priorities and unquestionably vastly expands the persons targeted for immigration enforcement action," Gergel said.
Gergel also barred South Carolina from making it a felony for anyone knowingly to harbor or transport an undocumented person.
The state cannot require immigrants to carry federal alien registration documents because such registration is under the exclusive control of the federal government, the judge said.
GET TOUGH
South Carolina is among states that have enacted tough laws against illegal immigration in the past two years, citing inaction by the federal government that has left a void in immigration policy.
But federal judges have consistently blocked the attempts, halting key parts of other immigration laws passed in Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Utah and Indiana.
South Carolina lawmakers' disagreement with federal immigration enforcement does not give the state the right to "adopt its own immigration policy to supplant the policy of the national government," Gergel said.
There are an estimated 11.2 million illegal immigrants in the United States, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.
(Editing by Colleen Jenkins, Jerry Norton and Bill Trott)
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

6 Comments so far
Show All"South Carolina is among states that have enacted tough laws against illegal immigration in the past two years, citing inaction by the federal government that has left a void in immigration policy. But federal judges have consistently blocked the attempts, halting key parts of other immigration laws passed in Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Utah and Indiana."
O.M.G. how did that get by the CD editor?
South Carolina is among states that have enacted tough laws against minorities in the past two years, thus interfering with what is supposed to be federal jurisdiction. But federal judges have consistently ruled for minorities rights, halting key parts of other racist laws passed in Alabama, Georgia, Arizona, Utah and Indiana.
There, made it more palatable to the CD audience.
This is surely going to be changed if the SCOTUS challenge of SB1070 is not successful. It is going to be decided by 8 justices because Kagen has recused herself. I bet there is a 5-3 decision to let SB1070 stand and then this law and every other state will have their police detaining illegals. It is going to be a rough decade.
"......police detaining illegals."
Is there something wrong with that?
Derby Lad. "police detaining illegals. Is there something wrong with that?" And while their at it, they should detain the employers who get rich using slave labor in horrible working conditions. An appropriate punishment would be five years hard labor. Harvesting fruits and vegetables ,maybe.
Paragraph 4 is a single incoherent sentence that contains 3 prepositional phrases. Whatever the Judge actually said, was lost in paragraph 4.
whocares;)
" Illegals " ? When I was growing up they were called " wetbacks " .