Tuesday,  June 26, 2012 • Vol. 12--No. 348 • 25 of 31 •  Other Editions

(Continued from page 24)

• The ruling was a victory for those who support few restrictions, saying the First Amendment affords them the right to spend as much as they want to support or defeat a candidate. Reformers vowed to press on, hoping to craft new laws to curb what they call the corrupting influence of money in politics.
• "The Supreme Court today has left standing the disastrous Citizens United decision and the enormous damage it is doing to our democracy and political system," Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer said Monday.
• ___

Arizona immigration court ruling leaves police chiefs, sheriffs with more questions on role

• TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) -- Arizona's police chiefs and county sheriffs hoped a U.S. Supreme Court ruling would settle their long-running debate on what role, if any, they should play in immigration enforcement. Instead, the justices' decision to uphold the state's "show me your papers" statute has left them with more questions than answers.
• How long must officers wait for federal authorities to respond when they encounter someone illegal, especially given President Barack Obama's new policy to only deport dangerous criminals and repeat offenders? If they release a person too soon, are they exposing themselves to a lawsuit from residents who accuse them of failing to enforce the law?
• How do they avoid being sued for racial profiling? Maricopa County Sheriff Joe

Arpaio said he anticipated no change in how he does his job but that comes from someone who was accused of racially profiling Latinos in a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Justice Department.
• "We're going to get sued if we do. We're going to get sued if we don't. That's a terrible position to put law enforcement officers in," said Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, whose territory covers much of southern Arizona and who has long argued against his state's requirement that local law enforcement be forced to ask about the legal status of anyone suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.
• The justices on Monday unanimously approved the Arizona law's most-discussed provision requiring police to check the immigration status of those they stop for other reasons. But it struck down provisions allowing local police to arrest people for federal immigration violations. They also warned against detaining people for any prolonged period merely for not having proper immigration papers.
• ___

(Continued on page 26)

© 2012 Groton Daily Independent • To send correspondence, click here.