Arizona's "Safe Streets" act, i.e. SB1070 -- safe from court challenges

Do you know why Arizon's SB1070 (and its revisions) are safe from any court challenges from ACLU and other organizations?

In order to challenge a law in court, one must demonstrate that the law in question is in conflict with an existing law, and the conflict must be resolved by the court, who then must rule. The resolution can be a full overturn, or explain that there is no conflict, or anything in between. 

The primary approach expected to challenge SB1070 is the preemption argument. American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and some constitution law scholars claim that Arizona law is preempted by Federal immigration laws. The US Constitution specified that only Federal government may enact and enforce immigration laws, not the states. Thus, Arizona law is preempted by the Federal laws on immigration.

The secondary approach is the rights argument, specifically 14th Amendment, in that States shall pass no law abridging any citizen or lawful resident of their Federally guaranteed rights. Their argument would be that the normal citizen or legal resident rights are violated by SB1070, and therefore SB1070 must be repealed.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Why-Court-Challenges-to-Arizona-SB1070-will-fail

AZ's SB1710... did you actually read it?

Did you actually read the law and the updates? Or did you just believe what people on TV and whatnot tell you to believe?

Did you know that Governor Brewer had actually revised the laws on 30-APR-2010, to further fix up the language to avoid any confusion as to the intent of the law?

Did you know that the law exactly mirrors the Federal law, and thus, cannot be pre-empted by Federal law, no matter what ACLU would like to claim?


For some neutral analysis, read this:

http://hubpages.com/hub/Arizona-Senate-Bill-1070-what-is-it-really

It is nowhere as NEAR controversial as its critics want you to believe.