Federal judge to hear DOJ's challenge to Utah's immigration enforcement law

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 12:06 p.m.

    Barack Obama and Eric Holder are courting the Latino vote for this falls election. It is clear that any radical group like La Raza or the ACLU will get preference to law abiding, tax paying Utah Citizens who are footing the $453 million annual cost to Utah for illegal immigrants. The Obama administration has shown no interest in enforcing the law and Holder who is responsible for the death of a border patrol agent in his fast and furious debacle is just a leftwing advocate. It is a trajedy that Utah is forced to see politics trump the law.

  • ouisc Farmington, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 11:24 a.m.

    Drug enforcement is a great example of how federal, state, and local agencies try to work together towards a common goal. The feds rely on local expertise, and the local expertise appreciates the heavier hand the feds can provide. Cooperation even works often!

    However, I am extremely embarassed the feds refuse to accept the help that is being offerred by the states to address the illegal immigration problem. It shows how insensitive our federal government is to the states' needs.

    What happens if the feds win this lawsuit? They are essentially suing themselves, as Utah is just trying to help enforce federal laws. So the feds are essentially suing enforcement of their laws. If the feds win this case, I'm gravely concerned about the future of immigration laws.

    I would love to see THIS administration take a leadership role in immigration enforcement! The states are SCREAMING to address this!!

  • Noah So Ogden, Ut
    Feb. 17, 2012 11:17 a.m.

    Here is a video exposing a major breach on the U.S./Mexico border near Lukeville, Ariz. located about 100 miles southwest of Tucson. It's entitled: Car Jack Used to Breach Border Fence on YouTube. This site will not allow me to post the URL so look it up and see the brazen drug dealers smuggle and mocking our security. Now tell me why our Government refuses to enforce the immigration laws already in place. I don't know about you but I worry about the safety of my children and family! I hope you will share this video with everyone you know. We need all Americans to watch it and consider its ramifications. Whether it be smuggling of illegal drugs, national security, or illegal immigration, every American should be shocked and demand answers!

    Feb. 17, 2012 10:50 a.m.


    If you want to play the God thing, doesn't he also believe in honoring and sustaining the law. You cannot claim one aspect of God and not other aspects just to suit yourself.

    "There is enough room and resources in this country to sustain all of Heavenly Father's Children."

    Why not just open our borders and allow all people to come here? We simply do not have enough resources in the United States to sustain all the people of the world.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    The irony of this challenge is the fact that you have states like California that refuse to enforce federal drug laws regarding marijuana, and make laws to legalize it there and the DOJ ignores it. Now when a state decides to help the government enforce federal law the DOJ challenges them and tells them to stop enforcing the law.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 10:38 a.m.


    The year is 2012, NOT 1820.
    You do realize I hope that we have a system for orderly immigration?

    Do you think that we shouldn't have ANY BORDERS whatsoever? Or, should we just erase the southern one?

    Many/most of the ones who sneak across the desert, aren't exactly here to do good, unless you count selling drugs, stealing i.d. and joining gangs "doing good", (your words).

    If we screen them through an orderly immigration process, we're much more likely to spot the ones who are here to break laws.

    Are YOU willing to give up YOUR job to an illegal immigrant trespasser?

    Why not?

  • Mugabe ACWORTH, GA
    Feb. 17, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    Did it ever occur to anyone that when the European Settlers came to this country that no one required them to prove legal status before enjoying the blessings of the country? The reason is that they were led here by the Spirit of God, or prophecy. The same is true for those who are trying to come here now. It has been prophesied in the scriptures that they would return, to claim the land of their Father's inheritance. Of all people, Latter Day Saints should rejoice at this because great blessings will follow those immigrants. They have a work to do, in preparation for the Lord's Second Coming.

    There is enough room and resources in this country to sustain all of Heavenly Father's Children. The Lord is not a poor planner. Neither is He unaware that this day would come, when the House of Joseph, the remnants of Jacob would come home. It is not the immigrants that is causing our short fall, it is the greed and avarice of our own country men.

    I believe that to fight against the migration of those people is only a fight against what is the will of God.

  • tenx Santa Clara, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 7:52 a.m.

    @Dave in Odgen. I agree with you. It makes me so mad when they pull over a fellow Welshman. I don't care about all the others but leave my Welshmen alone... they have rights you know.

  • Jonathan Eddy Payson, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 7:15 a.m.

    Listen people. The Federal government can do whatever they want and there is nothing we can do to stop it. They are in charge. We aren't. If they choose to not enforce illegal immigration, that's the way it is.

    What can we do about it? Nothing. What WILL we do about it? Complain. That's it. That's all we ever do. But we will never force the Federal government to comply because we are sheep. We will do whatever we are told.

    We don't impeach. We don't recall. We don't vote or masters out of office. We don't revolt. We just complain. So we should just get used to being told what to do by our elected masters, keep paying our income taxes, complain less and be grateful we have a house and a job.

  • anti-liar Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 4:02 a.m.

    ALL laws carry with it a potential for "profiling." So should we get rid of all laws because of this potentiality?

    Of course not.

    But the notion in the first place that profiling is inherently evil is a myth. Even the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that because the likelihood of a Latino being illegal is SO astronomically high, it is not unreasonable to take ethnicity into consideration ALONG WITH other factors.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 10:27 p.m.

    I don't know how this was mixed up. The infraction/misdemeanor was in reference to class a and b misdemeanors, and what violations they cover.

    This was the response to profiling.


    Is all profiling racism? If so is profiling at the airport for people from the Middle East or Eastern Europe?

    Or is it because that's where Al Quada is located and there is a greater probability of some one being a terrorist from there?

    Same question, with 80% of people here illegally from one ethnic group, is that racism, or going with probability?

    Are the Airports racist, or is profiling bad just where immigration is concerned.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 9:48 p.m.


    Is all profiling racism? If so is profiling at the airport for people from the Middle East or Eastern Europe?

    Or is it because that's where Al Quada is located and there is a greater probability of some one being a terrorist from there?

    Same question, with 80% of people here illegally from one ethnic group, is that racism, or going with probability?

    FYI According to the State of Utah

    An infraction is a minor offense punishable by a fine only, up to $750. Examples include city traffic violations and some disorderly conduct offenses.

    * Class A: Negligent homicide, DUI with injury, theft, assault on a police officer, criminal mischief, and possession of marijuana (more than one ounce, less than 16 ounces).
    * Class B: Assault, resisting arrest, DUI, reckless driving, possession of marijuana under one ounce, possession of drug paraphernalia, shoplifting (under $300), trespass of a dwelling, public nuisance, concealed weapon, and many traffic offenses.
    * Class C: Public intoxication, no valid license, and driving on a suspended license.

    Are the Airports racist, or is profiling bad just where immigration is concerned.

  • sportsfan21 OREM, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 9:31 p.m.


    What rights does an illegal alien have that I don't? I know every year that there won't be a law passed that will deport my family. I have the right to visit other countries without worrying if I can come back. I have the freedom to schedule an appointment with a specialized doctor instead of waiting in long lines in ERs and Instacares. I have the freedom of conscience to vote, work, and live knowing that I'm a contributing citizen. Don't act for a second like you envy them. If you would like to live in a single wide with your in-laws and work for minimum wage doing landscaping (as most illegals do) then be my guest.

    And to address your comment about crime, disease, and terrorists, I am not bothered by them coming across the border any more than I am bothered by the drugs and terrorists who are born here. The only real terrorists that have attacked us didn't come across the border, they got student visas. Should we end those? Should we deport those boys plotting bomb Roy HS?

    Stop being elitist and recognize that even if we need to fix immigration, we can't hate people for wanting what we are so blessed to have.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 9:30 p.m.


    The fact that you revert to the racism argument shows a lack of real thought. 1) This country is FAR less racist than in the past. Not sure how long you have been alive, but there have been some pretty ugly scenes of racism in this country. This is not racism. The federal government doesn't enforce its own policy. Illegal immigration is illegal for a reason. Someone has to deal with the problem.

  • DaveRL OGDEN, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 8:58 p.m.

    Racism runs deep in our country today, the worst I've seen since I was a child. Say what you will to defend this law but it's profiling and that is wrong.

    Feb. 16, 2012 8:33 p.m.

    The thing that really annoys me about this law being challenged is that the federal government gets mad when illegal immigrantsâ are held for serious crimes and not told that the have a right to contact the consulate. How is law enforcement supposed to tell them of that right if they do not know their immigration status? Also, for those saying this will lead to profiling, remember, these are at least B and C misdemeanors. That is not a simple moving violation. People have to be arrested before this law is going to take effect

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 7:19 p.m.

    Local police do a lot of less important enforcement than immigration and identity theft.

    The guest worker bills are more unconstitutional, and they remain untouched. This dishonesty of government, law enforcement and business far exceeds anything we have dealt with on a local level. We are watching the core principles of our country being destroyed.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 6:46 p.m.

    The US government has the right to profile. We do it right now at the airports and within 100 miles of our border.

    Profiling has been a tool of law enforcement for decades. That said, they can't ask them unless they have been detained for breaking another law. There is no profiling, just following up after the arrest for other possible abuses.

    Keep trying to take away our rights to enforce our immigration laws, and things will get ugly. NO ONE is doing a thing to stop this from happening now. As the economy improves, more will be coming here, and it will include people from India and Chna that see others doing it.

    We are destroying this country and making citizenship a joke.

  • realsoothsayer SANDY, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 5:35 p.m.

    Does it ever bother you (if you're a citizen) that people who invade our country and state have more benefits and rights than you do? Does it bother you that some categories of crime are not actually addressed at all by any level of government? Does it bother you that the ACLU and many elites put your needs and interests far below theirs, and those of the people they import to work cheap while you pick up all the social costs and cost of their benefits? Do you mind the uninhibited influx of drugs, criminals, diseases, dependents, terrorists, etc., etc.? Are you ever going to do anything about it, or do you just let those "in charge" design your life and shape your destiny for you while you play the dutiful spectator role? Think about it.

  • hybridbeing Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 4:57 p.m.

    Utahns love where they live, for the most part. It's beauty is breathtaking. I moved here in 2003. I can understand why others move here.

    Our state has been chosen as a relocation place for refugees/immigrants. While these people get here legally, I can understand why Utah attracts illegals. I can truly feel sorry for kids who came here as infants, and how they worry. I feel sorry for the whole family. Having our local police-whom we want to trust with rapes and drive-bys and such- doing immigration's work leaves a huge hole in the community when it comes to getting that help that is needed. It's a sorry situation.

  • sportsfan21 OREM, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 4:57 p.m.

    I agree with cjb. It's the federal government's role to regulate immigration. I know this is a very polarizing topic, but I think there's one important point that most of us can agree with. If state and local governments are allowed to look into citizenship status of those they detain, there will be an increase in racial profiling. Even if the US gov were to have this power it might turn to racial profiling. I'm not against e verify and punishing/ fining companies who hire illegal immigrants. However, we can't let ourselves have even an ounce of racial profiling. E Verify only works as long as an employer, when given one white and one latino candidate, won't say "there's a good chance one is illegal so I'd better choose the other to avoid all of that paperwork."

    Everyone's most treasured right in America should be the right to be innocent until proven guilty. This applies to hispanics and all other races. Breeding anger and hostility toward anyone who might be illegal is punishing the legal immigrants.

    In the end, this law should be removed because it makes it far too easy for an officer to racially profile someone then find some misdemeanor charge just to check his status.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 4:38 p.m.

    "It also says officers may attempt to verify the status of someone detained for class B and class C misdemeanors".


    This is problematic. If there are officers on any of the forces who makes it his/her mandate to go after illegals, they are bound to also go after hispanics who are here legally and this is profiling.

    This puts hispanics and even Indians more at risk for being stopped for minor or even non existent violations.

    Not that abuse can't happen at the federal level, but if immigration is kept at the federal level, you have one set of high level administrators, one set rules, and any abuses can be more readily set right.

    Such enforcement mechanisms are best kept at the federal level.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 3:53 p.m.

    Immigration enforcement is a federal responsibility.

    The federal government has provided little to none immigration enforcement.

    The question before the court seems to be: can the states defend themselves against illegal foreign invasions when the federal government doesn't?

    From another perspective: IF 100k foreign nationals invade Utah are we required to wait/hope for the feds to show up to arrest them, or can we detain them UNTIL the feds show up to arrest them?

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Feb. 16, 2012 3:50 p.m.

    U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups needs to step down. His conflict of interest is to great. Most judges would of excused themselves under the same circumstances.