The United States of America vs.The State of Arizona and Janice K. Brewer Governor FULL TEXT

Janice K. Brewer (“Governor Brewer”) and the State of Arizona oppose plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (doc. 27), which seeks to enjoin enforcement of the “Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act,” as amended (“SB 1070” or the “Act”). SB 1070 is Arizona’s legitimate and constitutionally permissible response to the crushing personal, environmental, criminal, and financial burdens thrust upon the State as a consequence of illegal immigration and the lack of comprehensive enforcement activity by the federal government and certain Arizona “sanctuary” cities. The Arizona Legislature enacted SB 1070 primarily to require that Arizona’s law enforcement officers cooperate in the enforcement of federal immigration laws and, pursuant to the State’s broad police powers, to establish state crimes that mirror existing federal laws.

Plaintiff seeks to enjoin SB 1070 as facially unconstitutional. Plaintiff’s claims find no support in the Constitution or federal law and, in many instances, contravene express congressional intent. Plaintiff bears a heavy burden of establishing that Sections 2 through 6 of SB 1070 are unconstitutional in all of their applications, that plaintiff will be irreparably harmed if the law is not enjoined, and that plaintiff’s interests in enjoining Sections 2 through 6 outweigh Arizona’s interests in having SB 1070 implemented.1 Plaintiff attempts to meet this burden by relying on faulty premises and inapposite case law. Plaintiff will not suffer any harm, much less irreparable harm, if SB 1070 is implemented because the Act requires only that Arizona’s law enforcement officers act in accordance with their constitutional authority and congressionally established federal policy. Plaintiff is not entitled to an injunction. FULL TEXT IN PDF FORMAT The United States of America vs.The State of Arizona and Janice K. Brewer Governor