- Texas man arrested for powder-letter hoax
- Islamic State opens ‘marriage bureau’ for single jihadists
- Drone almost blocks California firefighting planes
- Tornado rips off roofs, downs trees near Boston
- GOP: Environmental rules keeping agents from accessing border
- John Kerry: Millions displaced by religious fighting in 2013
- Federal appeals court rules against Virginia’s gay marriage ban
- White House says Russia ‘losing’ war in Ukraine
- Hamas turns to North Korea for weapons deal, Iran for money
- Syrian casualties surge as jihadis consolidate
Judge allows access to emails on immigration law
Question of the Day
FLORENCE, Ariz. (AP) - A judge has once again denied a request by two immigration-policy groups that sought to block subpoenas for all communications between the groups and state officials as the Arizona Legislature considered the state’s landmark 2010 immigration law.
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton on Friday denied a request by the Federation for American Immigration Reform and Immigration Reform Law Institute to reconsider her December decision that grants lawyers who are challenging the law access to the documents.
The challengers say they want access to letters, emails and memos between lawmakers and advocates for tougher immigration enforcement to see why proponents of the law believed it needed to be passed. They also are seeking documents to back up their claim that the law was passed with a discriminatory intent.
One of the subpoenas in question requested all communications between the two groups and any state official since January that contained the terms “immigrant,” ”undocumented,” ”day laborer,” ”Hispanic,” ”Mexican” and others.
The judge rejected the groups’ arguments that the communications were protected by attorney-client privilege, saying there was no evidence that the groups had such a relationship with state lawmakers.
“They have to comply with the subpoena,” said Karen Tumlin, one of the attorneys pushing the challenge to the law.
Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said the ruling interferes with the ability of private citizens to communicate with policy makers. “This is just a fishing expedition, and it shouldn’t be allowed,” Stein said.
Stein said the groups haven’t yet decided whether they would appeal Bolton’s ruling.
In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the law’s most contentious section that that required police, while enforcing other laws, to question people’s immigration status if they’re believed to be in the country illegally. The nation’s highest court struck down other sections of the law, such as a requirement that immigrants obtain or carry immigration registration papers.
TWT Video Picks
By Scott Pinsker
- D.C. seeks to stay judge's order allowing gun owners to carry in public
- Illegal immigrants demand representation in White House meetings
- Hillary Clinton: Forget Obama, George W. Bush made her 'proud to be an American'
- Babson College, BYU win top spots in Money magazine's college rankings
- Iraqi Christians rally at White House: 'Obama, Obama, where are you?'
- Tennessee Gov. Haslam slams White House for secret dump of illegals in his state
- Romney would win popular vote in rematch against Obama: CNN poll
- White House defends Kerry failure to broker Middle East cease-fire
- D.C. plans to seek stay of order striking down ban on handguns in public
- Islamic State opens 'marriage bureau' for single jihadists
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world
Fighting in Iraq