On July 9, 2010, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and a group of individuals filed suit against the state of Arizona, the governor, and several counties and county officials in Arizona, in the U.S. District Court of Arizona, District of Phoenix. The plaintiffs, represented by ...
read more >
On July 9, 2010, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and a group of individuals filed suit against the state of Arizona, the governor, and several counties and county officials in Arizona, in the U.S. District Court of Arizona, District of Phoenix. The plaintiffs, represented by public interest attorneys from the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and LULAC, sought declaratory and injunctive relief, claiming that the recently enacted S.B. 1070 violated the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, among other claims. Specifically, plaintiffs claimed that S.B. 1070 conflicted with federal law around immigration, both regarding unlawful entry and presence in the state. S.B. 1070 included a provision that requires, in the context of a lawful stop, the verification of an individual’s immigration status where there is a “reasonable suspicion” that the individual is unlawfully present in the United States. The plaintiff claimed that the training materials provided to law enforcement to explain “reasonable suspicion” were vague and imprecise. Plaintiff claimed that enforcement of S.B. 1070 would cause substantial and irreparable harm to them.
On December 15, 2010, the court granted a Motion to Dismiss filed by the Governor and the State of Arizona. The claims against the state were dismissed with prejudice based on immunity, while the claims against the governor were dismissed for lack of standing.
On January 24, 2011, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint, including the governor as a defendant but not the state.
On May 13, 2011, the court granted defendant governor’s alternative request to stay the case until final rulings are issued in two related cases. Those cases are Friendly House v. Whiting and United States v. Arizona.
On June 25, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in the related case United States v. Arizona. The court affirmed the lower court rulings, holding that several provisions of S.B. 1070 were preempted by federal law. The court declined to strike down the provision of S.B. 1070 that requires state police officers to check the immigration status of individuals arrested under non-immigration related state law, but did not uphold the provision either. Elizabeth Daligga - 06/25/2012