Skip to main content

Court's ruling a detour from basic rights

By Ali Noorani, Special to CNN
updated 12:15 PM EDT, Tue June 26, 2012
Protesters demonstrate against Arizona's SB1070 law in front of the Supreme Court on April 25 in Washington.
Protesters demonstrate against Arizona's SB1070 law in front of the Supreme Court on April 25 in Washington.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Ali Noorani: Court's decision at odds with emerging consensus on immigration
  • He says provision on "show your papers" upheld; this will likely lead to racial profiling
  • But Iowa and Indiana, faith and political leaders urge fixing immigration system, he says
  • Noorani: States at fork in road -- follow Arizona and Alabama or protect basic rights?

Editor's note: Ali Noorani is the executive director of the National Immigration Forum, an organization based in Washington that advocates for the value of immigrants. Follow him on Twitter.

(CNN) -- The nation is inching toward a new consensus on immigrants and America, but on Monday, the Supreme Court divided us.

The Supreme Court agreed with lower courts that three provisions of Arizona's SB 1070 law are prohibited because they violate the federal government's powers in setting immigration policy.

But a very important provision -- the pointy end of the SB 1070 sword -- was upheld by the court: Section 2(B), which requires law enforcement officers to determine the immigration status of those they stop, arrest or detain if there is "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful presence.

Implementation of Section 2(B) will cause irreparable harm in an Arizona where, for example, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio wreaks havoc with his harassment of immigrants..

Brewer: Obama admin launched 'assault' on Arizona

Ali Noorani
Ali Noorani

The court ruled that it is too early to know whether Section 2(B) can be implemented in a way that will not lead to racial profiling, in violation of the Constitution. While the court was clear that Monday's opinion leaves open the possibility of other challenges to SB 1070 after the law goes into effect, residents of Arizona must first be profiled for the case to return to Washington.

The decision runs counter to the common ground that some surprising constituencies are finding on immigrants and immigration policy.

Winners, losers in immigration policy debate?

Over the past year, moderate and conservative business, law enforcement, faith and political leaders from the Mountain West to the Southeast have pulled together to acknowledge that state immigration laws are hurting their economies and communities. Joining Midwestern leadership from Iowa and Indiana, these leaders are demanding that the federal government address our broken immigration system.

Toobin: Guidance from court not clear
Toobin: I have sympathy for AZ officers
Ariz. Gov. Brewer: This is not the end
Key parts of immigration law rejected

And, in the past two weeks, a remarkable group of hundreds of evangelical leaders from across the political spectrum delivered a similar message to our political leaders in Washington.

It called for a bipartisan solution on immigration that "respects the God-given dignity of every person ... the rule of law," and "establishes a path toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents."

A changing national mood on immigration?

But the Supreme Court's ruling sends a different message: Anyone who looks or sounds like an immigrant in Arizona is a stranger to be questioned, not welcomed.

Decades ago, the Supreme Court settled the issue of whether states had the right to pick and choose which Americans could enjoy the basic rights we hold dear. It was not a matter of states' rights. It was a matter of civil rights.

While the court upheld the supremacy of federal immigration law Monday, its decision on Section 2(B) condones the discrimination and racial profiling inherent in Arizona's SB 1070 law.

It also reopens wounds in our national psyche, with Latinos, Asians and other new Americans bearing the brunt of an immigration debate that gnaws at our nation.

At a glance: Supreme Court decision on Arizona's immigration law

But as Justice Anthony Kennedy indicated in reading the majority opinion, this is not the final word on SB 1070.

As it goes into effect, anti-discrimination suits are pending, and the Justice Department must step up its own civil rights enforcement efforts. Furthermore, the Department of Homeland Security must protect the basic rights of all and not cooperate with Arizona law enforcement officials who seek to detain and deport immigrants who are not a public safety or national security threat.

iReporter: Immigration law still racist

Meanwhile, legislatures across the country face a fork in the road. Do they follow Alabama, Georgia and other states that passed copycat laws? Or do they follow Mississippi and Florida, where cooler heads prevailed and halted legislation inspired by Arizona?

As legislatures wrestle with their decision, they should remember that SB 1070 and its Alabama sister, HB 56, proved to be economic disasters rather than growth strategies. Arizona lost $141 million in direct spending by convention attendees when conferences were canceled. Zealous implementation of Alabama's anti-immigrant law led to the arrest of a job-creating Mercedes-Benz manager who forgot his identification in his hotel room.

Immigration brings out the best in America, and better days lie ahead.

Eventually, when Congress passes comprehensive immigration reform, America will be a better place because our elected leadership will help us treat each other as human beings with the dignity and love all human beings deserve.

With courageous political leaders, we can get to that place. But on Monday, the Supreme Court sent us on a detour.

Immigration fight changes Arizona, groups say

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Ali Noorani.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
updated 12:15 PM EDT, Sun July 27, 2014
Megan McCracken and Jennifer Moreno say it's unacceptable for states to experiment with new execution procedures without full disclosure
updated 1:28 PM EDT, Sat July 26, 2014
Jeff Yang says it's great to see the comics make an effort at diversifying the halls of justice
updated 11:55 AM EDT, Sat July 26, 2014
Rick Francona says the reported artillery firing from Russian territory is a sign Vladimir Putin has escalated the Ukraine battle
updated 2:22 PM EDT, Sun July 27, 2014
Paul Callan says the fact that appeals delay the death penalty doesn't make it an unconstitutional punishment, as one judge ruled
updated 6:25 PM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Pilot Robert Mark says it's been tough for the airline industry after the plane crashes in Ukraine and Taiwan.
updated 11:10 AM EDT, Fri July 25, 2014
Jennifer DeVoe laments efforts to end subsidies that allow working Americans to finally afford health insurance.
updated 11:33 AM EDT, Sat July 26, 2014
Ruti Teitel says assigning a costly and humiliating "collective guilt" to Germany after WWI would end up teaching the global community hard lessons about who to blame for war crimes
updated 8:45 AM EDT, Fri July 25, 2014
John Sutter responds to criticism of his column on the ethics of eating dog.
updated 9:02 AM EDT, Fri July 25, 2014
Frida Ghitis says it's tempting to ignore North Korea's antics as bluster but the cruel regime is dangerous.
updated 2:50 PM EDT, Fri July 25, 2014
To the question "Is Putin evil?" Alexander Motyl says he is evil enough for condemnation by people of good will.
updated 2:03 PM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Laurie Garrett: Poor governance, ignorance, hysteria worsen the Ebola epidemic in Sierra Leone, Guinea, Liberia.
updated 9:49 AM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Patrick Cronin and Kelley Sayler say the world is seeing nonstate groups such as Ukraine's rebels wielding more power to do harm than ever before
updated 6:05 PM EDT, Wed July 23, 2014
Ukraine ambassador Olexander Motsyk places blame for the MH17 tragedy squarely at the door of Russia
updated 7:42 AM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Mark Kramer says Russia and its proxies have a history of shooting down civilian aircraft, often with few repercussions
updated 2:53 PM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Les Abend says, with rockets flying over Tel Aviv and missiles shooting down MH17 over Ukraine, a commercial pilot's pre-flight checklist just got much more complicated
updated 9:17 AM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Mark Kramer says Russia and its proxies have a history of shooting down civilian aircraft, often with few repercussions
updated 12:37 PM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
Gerard Jacobs says grieving families and nations need the comfort of traditional rituals to honor the remains of loved ones, particularly in a mass disaster
updated 10:13 AM EDT, Thu July 24, 2014
The idea is difficult to stomach, but John Sutter writes that eating dog is morally equivalent to eating pig, another intelligent animal. If Americans oppose it, they should question their own eating habits as well.
updated 12:30 PM EDT, Wed July 23, 2014
Bill van Esveld says under the laws of war, civilians who do not join in the fight are always to be protected. An International Criminal Court could rule on whether Israeli airstrikes and Hamas rocketing are war crimes.
updated 10:08 AM EDT, Wed July 23, 2014
Gordon Brown says the kidnapped Nigerian girls have been in captivity for 100 days, but the world has not forgotten them.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT