29_35x90 knx_35x90
CBSLA WEATHER APP: iPhone App Store | Android App Coming Soon | More Info | Watch Josh's Live Demo

Local

Mayor ‘Heartened’, ‘Disappointed’ After Immigration Ruling

View Comments
Election Returns

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was among several public officials who offered mixed reactions to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Arizona’s law targeting illegal immigrants on Monday, saying he was “heartened” as well as “disappointed” with the ruling.

KNX 1070’s Claudia Peschiutta reports Villaraigosa joined those who hailed the rejection of many portions of the law but condemned the court’s decision to uphold a provision calling on local law enforcement to check suspects’ immigration status.

The court struck down three provisions of the law as encroachments on federal policies but upheld the one requiring police officers to review the immigration status of people they stop.

“I’m disappointed with their decision with respect to the ‘show me your papers’ provision,” said Villaraigosa, who called the ruling a “partial victory”.

The Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA) called the Arizona law one of the “ugliest anti-immigrant laws in the country.”

“The High Court’s ruling to invalidate Provisions 3, 5, and 6 but allow Provision 2(B) to go forward for now makes it possible for Arizona to codify racial profiling by allowing the `show me your papers’ provision to be implemented,” the group said in a statement.

But KNX 1070’s Ron Kilgore reports it was that same provision that gave an Orange County-based Latino group opposed to illegal immigration a glimmer of hope that the nation’s laws will continue to be enforced.

“I think we won the most important [provision] of the four, the other ones I think we could deal with because they’re actually federal law now, and we just need the federal government to do its job,” said Lupe Moreno, president of Latino Americans For Immigration Reform.

The Obama administration sued to block the Arizona law soon after its enactment two years ago. Federal courts had refused to let the four key provisions take effect.

The other states adopted variations on Arizona’s law. Parts of those laws also were on hold pending the outcome of the Supreme Court case.

(TM and © Copyright 2012 CBS Local Media, a division of CBS Radio Inc. and its relevant subsidiaries. CBS RADIO and EYE Logo TM and Copyright 2011 CBS Broadcasting Inc. Used under license. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

View Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus