Arizona immigration case gets attention from Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the Unit- ed States will be hearing a case this week out of Arizona that could have broad implications on illegal immigration throughout the country.

And, no, the case does not involve Arizona’s famous — some would say infamous — SB1070, the law passed earlier this year that gives Arizona police broad authority to inquire about the status of state residents suspected of being in the country illegally. The case coming before the Supreme Court this week involves a three-year-old law that was designed to discourage illegal immigration by holding employers responsible for hiring illegal immigrants.

Unlike the most recent Arizona law, the employee verification bill hasn’t gotten much national attention. But it has come under fire — and legal challenge — by, among others, the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry and 10 other U.S. and Arizona business groups. They claim that the bill contributes to a patchwork of immigration laws that puts Arizona business at a disadvantage.

The implications of the case could be wide-ranging. In effect, the business groups — joined by the American Civil Liberties Union — are making the same argument in this case that pro-immigration groups have made against SB 1070. Immigration enforcement, they say, is a federal responsibility.

The Legal Arizona Workers Act of 2007 allows the state to suspend and even revoke the licenses of companies that knowingly hire illegal aliens. It also requires companies to use “E-Verify,” the federal database, to determine the legal status of an applicant.

Legal differences

Of course, no two cases that reach the Supreme Court are exactly alike, and lower federal courts have upheld the LAW Act so far, while a federal district judge has already blocked enforcement of SB1070.

But despite legal technicalities, if the court were to rule that federal responsibility for enforcement trumps state law, the prospects for SB1070 prevailing would be dim.

On the other hand, if it upholds the LAW Act, even on narrow grounds — it would likely spur other states to adopt similar measures.

We have long maintained that enforcement of employment law is a legitimate response to the illegal immigration problem because it discourages illegal immigration and encourages those already here illegally to consider their options. At the same time, the status quo is untenable. Aggressively pursing the deportation of millions of people who have put down roots here, who have children who are American citizens, and who have been living productive, law-abiding lives doesn’t serve the nation’s interests. While states should have some latitude in protecting their interests, sensible immigration reform has to come from Congress.

That need is notwithstanding whatever the Supreme Court finds in this or subsequent immigration cases.