1. Foundation advocates for SB1070
2. Study: Effects of birthright repeal
3. States push to adopt AZ law
4. LAPD Chief heckled by protesters
5. Protests over death continue

1.
Legal advocate asks court to side with Arizona's alien law
By Jerry Seper
The Washington Times, September 9, 2010

The Washington Legal Foundation asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco on Wednesday to reject a challenge by the Obama administration to Arizona's new immigration law, calling it a "well-designed effort" to provide enforcement assistance to federal immigration officials.

"State and local governments have an important role to play in enforcing our nations immigration laws," said WLF chief counsel Richard Samp after filing a brief in the case. "Unless they are both permitted and encouraged to assist the federal government in enforcing those laws, it is unlikely that we will ever be able to stem the flood of illegal immigrants."

The Justice Department, at the urging of the White House, sued in July to stop Arizona's new immigration law, known as SB 1070, in a move that escalated President Obama's involvement in the thorny issue of immigration reform and stacked him against a majority of Americans who support the law.

The department argued that Arizona lawmakers were attempting to violate the Constitution by trying to supersede federal law and by impairing illegal immigrants' right to travel and conduct interstate commerce. It said only the federal government can write immigration rules and that "diverting federal resources away from dangerous aliens such as terrorism suspects and aliens with criminal records" would have an impact on the entire country's safety.

"Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility," Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., said at the time. "Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves."

The WLF urged the appeals court to overturn a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the law, issued in July by an Arizona federal district judge. It argued that the Arizona statute does not conflict with federal law but rather is a well-designed effort to provide enforcement assistance to federal immigration officials."

A nonprofit public interest law firm based in Washington, D.C., the WLF has described SB 1070 as a "multi-faceted effort to assist federal authorities in implementing several well-established federal policies: removing illegal aliens from the U.S. and eliminating incentives that cause many such aliens to seek to remain in this country.

It said SB 1070 includes numerous safeguards to ensure that it does not result in harassment of citizens and resident aliens, including provisions that prevent Arizona officials from taking action until after they have been informed by federal officials that a suspect is an illegal immigrant.

"Congress has adopted many laws designed to encourage state and local governments to assist in the immigration enforcement effort," the WLF said. "Nonetheless, the Obama administration has determined that it does not want states to provide the level of assistance that Arizona is offering."
. . .
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/sep/8/legal-advocate-asks-court...

********
********

2.
Birthright Repeal Likely to Increase Illegal Population
By Miriam Jordan
The Wall Street Journal, September 9, 2010

A denial of birthright citizenship for U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants would end up increasing the size of the nation's illegal population, according to a new study released Wednesday.

The idea of ending birthright citizenship has become popular among politicians and activists seeking to curb the number of illegal immigrants. But Jennifer Van Hook, a demographer and the report's principal author, said such a change would instead increase the size of the illegal population, a commonsense result of illegal immigrants having children after a birthright repeal.

The analysis by the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute predicted illegal U.S.-born individuals would number about five million by 2050, if birthright citizenship were repealed in the near future. Currently, the U.S. is home to a total of 11 million illegal immigrants.

"Even assuming an immediate and complete halt in new illegal immigration, repeal of birthright citizenship would generate a large U.S.-born unauthorized population that has the potential to grow," said Prof. Van Hook, who teaches demography at Pennsylvania State University.

Jon Feere, legal policy analyst at the Center for Immigration Studies, a right-leaning research group that favors more restrictive immigration policies, agreed that "ending automatic birthright citizenship would not automatically end all illegal immigration."

But, Mr. Feere added, "it will put an end to pregnant women traveling to the U.S. specifically for the purpose of giving birth" to get U.S. passports for their children.

All children born on U.S. soil are citizens, whether their parents are illegal residents or not. Some foes of illegal immigration have called for amending the Constitution to deny this birthright citizenship to children born to illegal residents. They say the status quo entices people to sneak into the U.S. to secure welfare and other benefits through their children.

Efforts to amend the Constitution, which is notoriously difficult to do, have stalled in Congress in the past.

Some state lawmakers also have proposed withholding birth certificates from U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants, if the Constitution's 14th Amendment is not altered.
. . .
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000142405274870436240457548004144227421...

********
********

3.
Ariz. Immigration Law Spreads
By Sean Higgins
Investors Business Daily, September 9, 2010

Soon after Arizona passed its immigration law, critics argued that the action would isolate the Grand Canyon state. Boycotts would follow. Businesses would flee.

But the backlash never arrived. Instead, other states are pushing to adopt Arizona's immigration restrictions.

"I've never seen legislation move between the states that quickly," said Will Gheen, head of Americans for Legal Immigration. "We think the law spreading to other states will help to protect Arizona."

Polls have shown that majorities favor the Arizona law, and politicians have jumped on the bandwagon. Tennessee passed a similar law in late June.

Minnesota, Feeling Arizona?

According to media reports and the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures, six other states introduced Arizona-style legislation: South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Michigan and New Jersey.

The Minnesota, Rhode Island and South Carolina legislatures have ended work for 2010. But pro-restriction groups believe they've set the stage for future action.

Gheen's ALI, which pushes for restrictionist laws at the state level, says 22 states are mulling Arizona-style bills. This broad estimate includes states with lawmakers who have said they intend to pursue bills.

Gubernatorial candidates in 20 states have endorsed Arizona-type legislation, Politico reports.

The trend worries immigrant-rights groups. In a recent conference call by the Florida Immigrant Coalition, sympathetic GOP state Rep. Juan Carlos Zapata conceded that little could be done at the state level.

"If we would have had some action at the federal level — at least a piece of paper that addresses this issue — it would give a lot of states pause before they run off and do their own thing," Zapata said.

Ann Morse, director of NCSL's immigration policy project, thinks Gheen is overly optimistic in saying 22 states are moving on Arizona-like laws. Plus, a year can be a long time in politics and the courtroom.

"I don't expect to see anything until next year. I think everybody is waiting for the court decision," Morse said. "There is a lot of talk, but most people are at the stages where they are still drafting bills."

But if the court battles go the restrictionists' way, Morse expects to see a lot of Arizona-style bills.

"The question is: How far will it get?" she said.

Steve Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors restrictionist policies, says states can do a lot beyond adopting Arizona-type laws. One is the Secure Communities program, under which state and local governments can agree to send fingerprints of all arrestees to federal immigration databases.

"The immigration services aren't going to come in every instance (of an illegal getting arrested), but if you are a felon they are going to come," Camarota said. "I expect you'll see a lot more of that."

He cites California's Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Jerry Brown. The longtime liberal has criticized the Arizona law, but as attorney general he rejected a request last month by the San Francisco Police Department to opt out of Secure Communities.

Comprehensive immigration reform never got off the ground in Congress this year. Even the liberal House leadership refused to act, insisting that the Senate go first.
. . .
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/546444/201009081911/Ari...

********
********

4.
LAPD Chief Beck heckled by angry crowd at Westlake community meeting
By Esmerelda Bermudez
Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2010

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck was heckled Wednesday night as he addressed an angry crowd that had gathered at a Westlake school for a community meeting in the aftermath of a deadly police shooting.

The crowd shouted: "Boo!" "Killers!" and "Assassins!" as Beck took the microphone at John H. Liechty Middle School.

"I hope we came here to have a discussion," Beck said. "Please, let's respect each other."

Beck had to step away from the microphone as the heckling continued.

[Updated at 7:49 p.m.: Beck returned to the microphone after a few minutes and promised that the LAPD would conduct a "fair investigation" of the shooting.]
. . .
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/09/west.html

********
********

5.
LAPD squad cars chase after protesters on 6th Street in Westlake
By Joel Rubin
Los Angeles Times, September 8, 2010

Riot-clad Los Angeles police officers in patrol cars Wednesday night were playing a cat-and-mouse game with throngs of protesters along 6th Street in the third straight day of violent clashes following the deadly shooting of a Guatemalan immigrant who allegedly threatened officers and passersby by with a knife.

A few hundred people had gathered at Burlington Avenue and 6th in Westlake, where some hurled bottles at squad cars. Others shouted "Pig!" and profanities at officers as they got out of their vehicles, rifles in their hands.

At least one fire was lighted, but it was quickly extinguished.
. . .
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/09/lapd-squad-cars-chase-afte...