Monday, September 20, 2010

LEGALS PUMP MONEY INTO ARIZONA'S DEFENSE AGAINST MEX INVASION AND OBAMA'S ASSAULT!

The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com
Arizona immigration law: Funds roll in from across US to defend it
Many contributions made online or sent by mail are $20, $50, or $100 – for a total of $3.6 million. As long as donations keep coming, state taxpayers are off the hook as Gov. Jan Brewer defends the Arizona immigration law.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer meets with Sen. John McCain McCain campaign headquarters in August in Phoenix. Brewer established a legal defense in May to help her state fend off lawsuits challenging its immigration law.
(Ross D. Franklin/AP)
________________________________________
By Lourdes Medrano, Correspondent
posted September 10, 2010 at 8:26 pm EDT
Tucson, Ariz. —
A legal defense fund established by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer in May to help Arizona fend off lawsuits challenging its controversial immigration enforcement law has received donations totalling $3.6 million from about 41,000 sympathizers across the country. The sum is well more than the $440,000 known to have been spent defending the law so far.
The Arizona immigration law, which critics say will lead to racial profiling, is facing several lawsuits, including one from the US Department of Justice, and the cost to defend it could reach several million dollars, legal experts say. The defense fund received a significant boost from one contributor, a Wyoming resident who donated $1.5 million in mid-August, Gov. Brewer disclosed recently.
The figure of $440,000 represents the defense costs for the first two months of legal challenges, but the documents from the governor's office extend through June and do not cover July court hearings before federal Judge Susan Bolton, who blocked implementation of key elements of the law. Brewer’s appeal is now at the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
IN PICTURES: Arizona immigration law protests
Although the governor’s office has no estimates on total legal expenses that might be incurred, Brewer’s spokesman, Paul Senseman, says the state’s mounting legal costs are expected to be considerable. The legal work so far is massive, Mr. Senseman says, citing 900 legal filings in the lawsuits that total about 12,000 pages.
“It’s impossible to accurately estimate because there are so many variables involved, including when and how federal judges rule, what appeals may be undertaken, the length of the appeals,” he says.
Paul Bender, a law professor at Arizona State University, concurs with Senseman and says legal costs will skyrocket quickly especially if the battle over the law lands in the US Supreme Court. The professor says he wouldn’t be surprised if expenses, mostly in attorney’s fees, reach $10 million.
“If you hire a big law firm to work on a case like this and they charge you on an hourly basis the amounts can become quite large very quickly,” he says.
The private attorneys working for Arizona are billing Brewer adjusted hourly rates that vary from $225 to $450 per hour, according to the firm’s contract with the state.
Brewer hired Snell & Wilmer LLC, a corporate law firm based in Phoenix, to defend the state’s right to enforce the legislation after a running dispute over the law with Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat who opposes the law and is challenging her in the November election. Mr. Goddard eventually withdrew from representing the state in court.
As long as donations keep rolling in, state taxpayers are off the hook. The governor’s office has not released information on the potential use of public dollars when and if the fund dries up. So far the fund “has been sufficient to provide payment for these legal bills,” Senseman says.
The next-largest contribution after the $1.5 million donation from Timothy Mellon of Saratoga, Wyo., totals $5,000. Many contributions made online or sent by mail are $20, $50, $100 and higher. Donations to the fund surged after the Obama administration filed its suit and exemplify the kind of strong support the law has garnered nationwide.
One of those supporters is Arizona retiree Gary Piekaar, who lives in Havasu City. He chipped in $50 this week to Brewer’s defense fund out of frustration with illegal immigration overall and the federal government’s legal challenge to the state law.
“The federal government should be funding it, not fighting it,” he says.
*
Obama Promises Hispanic Caucus He Will Fight for DREAM Act
Addressing the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) Gala Wednesday, President Obama told CHC members and guests that he would do whatever it takes to support their efforts to pass the DREAM Act. (White House transcript, Sept. 15, 2010) The President acknowledged that many in the audience were frustrated with him for failing to move amnesty legislation “over the finish line,” but promised them that he would not walk away from this fight. “We need an immigration policy that works—a policy that meets the needs of families and businesses while honoring our tradition as a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws,” he said. “We need it for the sake of our economy, we need it for our security, and we need it for our future.” (Id.)
President Obama went on to blame Republicans for the failure to pass “comprehensive” immigration reform. “To make real progress on these or any issues, we’ve got to break the Republican leadership’s blockade,” said the President. “Without the kind of bipartisan effort we had just a few short years ago, we can’t get these reforms across the finish line.” The President accused most of the Republicans who voted for amnesty a few years ago from “walking away from that vote,” while conveniently forgetting to share that 16 Democrats voted against the Senate amnesty bill in 2007 (S.1639).
President Obama further asserted that the failure to pass amnesty legislation was the reason that “states like Arizona have taken matters into their own hands.” To loud applause, he proudly told the audience he was fighting the Arizona law because he felt it was the wrong way to deal with this issue. “It interferes with federal immigration enforcement. It makes it more difficult for … local law enforcement to do its job. It strains state and local budgets. And if other states follow suit, we’ll have an unproductive and unworkable patchwork of laws across the country.” (White House video, Sept. 15, 2010)
Finally, the President concluded his remarks by trying to build enthusiasm for the upcoming election. “Don’t ever believe that this election coming up doesn’t matter,” he said. “Don’t forget who is standing with you, and who is standing against you.”
The President’s speech came on the eve of a White House meeting between members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus and Sen. Menendez (D-NJ) to plot a strategy for passing the DREAM Act through the Senate this week. CHC member and Rep. Gutierrez analogized the efforts between the Obama administration and the CHC to those of a football team, observing “I think the White House, the Democrats, and the allies that support serious immigration reform are going on offense and the President is our quarterback.” (Homeland Security Today, Sept. 17, 2010)
Senator Menendez to Unveil Amnesty Bill
Following a closed-door meeting at the White House with President Obama and leaders of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus last Wednesday, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) announced that he plans to introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill before the year’s end. (The Hill, Sept. 16, 2010) The new bill is part of immigration reform advocates’ newly unveiled three-point plan: press for immediate passage of the DREAM Act, rally behind immigration reform legislation that Sen. Bob Menendez is planning to introduce, and press President Barack Obama to provide “administrative relief” by easing up on Bush-era deportation policies. (Roll Call, Sept. 15, 2010) Sources familiar with the announcement say that the bill could be introduced even before the November 2 midterm elections, and would closely resemble the reform framework proposed by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) earlier this year. (Politico, Sept. 15, 2010) That proposal included amnesty, eased deportation proceeding requirements, and stripped state and local governments of their power to combat illegal immigration. (See FAIR Legislative Summary, Apr. 30, 2010)


FAIR Legislative Update September 13, 2010

No comments: