Utah to scrap parts of immigration law under deal

Utah to scrap parts of immigration law under deal

(File Image)


2 photos
Save Story
Leer en español

Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes

This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.

SALT LAKE CITY — An agreement that scraps key provisions of Utah's controversial immigration enforcement law is being described by a civil rights attorney as a "victory for the courageous plaintiffs in this case and for immigrant communities throughout the state."

Jennifer Chang Newell of the ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project said Tuesday that Utah's decision to settle a lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of HB497 sends a message to cities and states across the country "that they have no business stopping or detaining people just because of suspicions about their immigration status."

On Tuesday, the civil rights organization announced the settlement, under which the state has agreed to permanently block or impose limits on provisions of the controversial law passed by the Utah Legislature in 2011.

HB497 was among a package of immigration bills passed by Utah lawmakers that year during a contentious legislative session in which immigration issues dominated the Legislature's agenda.

In May 2011, civil rights attorneys representing individuals and organizations filed a lawsuit against the state, claiming HB497 was unconstitutional and invited racial profiling.

The Utah Attorney General's Office, which defended the law, did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday on the settlement.

After two motion hearings on HB497 — one conducted after the Supreme Court ruled on Arizona's so-called "show me you papers law" — U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups in July blocked some sections of the Utah law from going into effect but let others stand.

Waddoups' decision and order enjoined the state from enforcing portions of the law dealing with federal immigration enforcement assistance. Two other sections of the law that referred to warrantless arrests and harboring undocumented individuals were also pre-empted.

Waddoups' final judgement, which is part of the settlement, refers to sections of the Utah law that overreached and were "impermissible."


It's finally clear in Utah that treating people differently based on the way they look or whether they have an accent is just plain wrong.

–Archie Archuleta, plaintiff


One "impermissible" section of the law, he wrote, sought to "bestow on state officers greater discretion and authority than that possessed by federal immigration officials, establishes a de facto state immigration policy which may be in conflict with Congress' carefully crafted policy and violates the removal process that has been entrusted to the federal government."

Another section of HB497 deemed "impermissible" sought to regulate the entry and residence of aliens, and makes new state offenses for conduct already criminalized by Congress' existing regulation scheme.

The final judgement goes into effect upon Waddoups' signature.

The ACLU of Utah, in a statement, described HB497 as "a severe, anti-immigrant law that would have criminalized everyday activities."

Karen McCreary, executive director of the ACLU of Utah, said the settlement paves the way for the state to address issues that affect families and community safety "without the scourge of fear and racial profiling this law created."

Archie Archuleta, a plaintiff in La Raza v. Herbert, said Tuesday was a great day for Utahns "no matter where they were born."

After a legal challenge that lasted more than three years, "it's finally clear in Utah that treating people differently based on the way they look or whether they have an accent is just plain wrong," Archuleta said.

In the 2011 lawsuit, civil rights groups claimed HB497 violated Fourth Amendment protections, as well as the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, because it unlawfully interfered with federal power and authority over immigration matters.

The entire law had been temporarily enjoined as Waddoups considered legal arguments from the state and plaintiffs' attorneys, as well as briefs filed by the parties and many others who filed amicus briefs.

Two other immigration-related laws passed by the Utah Legislature in 2011 were effectively shelved until July 1, 2015, under a bill passed by the Utah Legislature in 2013. The laws addressed issues related to guest workers and a pilot program to allow Utahns to sponsor foreign nationals.

Photos

Related links

Related stories

Most recent Utah stories

Related topics

U.S.Utah
Marjorie Cortez

    STAY IN THE KNOW

    Get informative articles and interesting stories delivered to your inbox weekly. Subscribe to the KSL.com Trending 5.
    By subscribing, you acknowledge and agree to KSL.com's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

    KSL Weather Forecast