Judge who ruled on Arizona law is well versed in immigration cases

[pampango]

Source: Washington Post

The federal judge who blocked key aspects of Arizona's new immigration law was so well regarded across the political spectrum that she was nominated to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, who tapped her on the recommendation of Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), one of Congress's most conservative senators.

Hate mail and threats flowed into her court offices, according to news reports. Conservative bloggers decried her "activist" leanings and accused her of falling in with the American Civil Liberties Union, a prominent challenger of the law and a favorite target of the right. And Kyl, who during Bolton's nomination hearings in 2000 lauded her expertise and fairness, did not conceal his disappointment.

Bolton is no stranger to controversy or to cases that might elicit death threats. Since beginning her career as a judge in 1989, she has taken on Mexican smugglers, civil libertarians and members of the Arizona legislature. While a Superior Court justice in Maricopa County, she handled some of the most complex and delicate cases to come before the court, a colleague said. In her decade on the federal bench, she has overseen cases that touched on border issues.

No other case, however, has thrust her into the national spotlight like her decision Wednesday to block the most contentious parts of Arizona's law, including provisions that would have required police officers to check the immigration status of people they arrest. People close to Bolton said she is a meticulous jurist who is not easily shaken by such attention.

"Put it this way: Susan has never been accused of being a coward," said retired Superior Judge Ken Fields, who worked alongside Bolton for a decade. "She's probably the perfect judge to have for this case. She analyzes the facts and makes a decision without bias one way or the other."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/29/AR2010072905981.html?hpid=topnews

[jody]

1. However under existing law "Arpaio Behind 25% of US Deportations Since 2006"

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/US-Immigration-Local-Enforcement/2010/07/28/id/365835

Without the benefit of their state's strict new immigration law, officers from a single Arizona county helped deport more than 26,000 immigrants from the U.S. through a federal-local partnership program that has been roundly criticized as fraught with problems.

Statistics obtained by The Associated Press show that the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office was responsible for deportations or forced departure of 26,146 immigrants since 2007.

That's about a quarter of the national total of 115,841 sent out of the U.S. by officers in 64 law enforcement agencies deputized to help enforce immigration laws, some since 2006, under the so-called 287(g) program.

The tens of thousands of immigrant arrests show local officials already have a significant amount of authority to enforce immigration laws and help remove illegal immigrants from the country.

[pinboy3niner]

8. Too bad that headline is not true

AP's mistake is in conflating deportations attributable to the 287(g) program with total US deportations.

Joe's Maricopa County Sheriff's Office IS responsible for a huge proportion of the local agency arrests leading to deportations, but that is NOT 25% of "US Deportations". It's 25% of only the 115, 841 arrests made by the 64 local agencies in the 287(g) program--which are only a portion of total US deportations, as they exclude deportations attributable to arrests made by FEDERAL agents.

If the "since 2007" figures cited by AP in the story refer to full-year data for FY '08 and '09, Arpaio's 26,146 deportations actually account for 3.5% of the 746,676 total US deportations in those years. (If AP also is including some part-year data for FY '10, Arpaio's percentage would be smaller. If the "since 2006" period cited in the headline is used, the percentage also would be smaller.)

[jody]

9. The article says "forced departure". Do you have am INS source that refutes that? n/t

[theoldman]

2. Republicans hate any organization that forces them to follow the law.

As an example, the ACLU is non political yet most or their cases are against Republicans. This should tell you who obeys the laws in this country.

[seafan]

3. Thankfully, not one of Monica Goodling's picks for immigration judgeship.

Judge (Susan Bolton) who ruled on Arizona law is well versed in immigration cases, July 30, 2010

.....

No other case, however, has thrust her into the national spotlight like her decision Wednesday to block the most contentious parts of Arizona's law, including provisions that would have required police officers to check the immigration status of people they arrest. People close to Bolton said she is a meticulous jurist who is not easily shaken by such attention.

.....

GOP recount riot operative is now immigration judge; another immigration judge frees Posada Carriles, from May, 2007

[lonestarnot]

4. There for a minute I thought she was implementing Sharia law from the bench.

:rofl: :toast: Honorable Bolten!

[UTUSN]

5. K&R #6 for, respect for the law ( ... ) n/t

[MadMaddie]

6. I knew they would be threatening her life after the decision was

made.

The reichwing absolutely hate the Constitution that is the only logical explanation.

[Tempest]

7. As predictable as the sun rising in the morning

Next will come the letters with powder in them.

[MadMaddie]

10. Yea, interesting how the last white powder

event was never solved by the Republicans.