federal appeals court has decided not to step into the controversy over Arizona's tough immigration law until November

PHOENIX A federal appeals court has decided not to step into the controversy over Arizona’s tough immigration law until November, leaving state officials to consider other steps they might take in the meantime.Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the law and appealed a ruling blocking its most controversial sections, said Friday she would consider changes to “tweak” the law to respond to the parts U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton faulted.

“Basically we believe (the law) is constitutional but she obviously pointed out faults that can possibly be fixed, and that’s what we would do,” Brewer told The Associated Press. Brewer said she’s talking to legislative leaders about the possibility of a special session, but said no specific changes had been identified.In her temporary injunction Wednesday, Bolton delayed the most contentious provisions of the law, including a section that required officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws. Bolton indicated the federal government’s case has a good chance at succeeding in its argument that federal immigration law trumps state law.Brewer has said she’ll challenge the decision all the way to the Supreme Court.The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in an order late Friday that it will hold a hearing on Brewer’s challenge in the first week of November. Briefs from the state are due Aug. 26.

Brewer had asked for an expedited appeals process, with a hearing scheduled for the week of Sept. 13. State lawyers had argued that the appeal involves an issue of “significant importance” the state’s right to implement a law to address “the irreparable harm Arizona is suffering as a result of unchecked unlawful immigration.”The federal government countered that there was no need to expedite the matter because “the only effect of the district court’s injunction in this case is to preserve a status quo that has existed for a long period of time.”

Calls Friday night to Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman and Phoenix attorney John Bouma, who is defending the immigration law on the governor’s behalf, were not immediately returned.Democrats scoffed at Brewer’s desire to change the law, with a key House minority leader calling it laughable.”Why would we help her?” asked Rep. Kyrsten Sinema of Phoenix. “This bill is so flawed and clearly a federal judge agrees.”

House Speaker Kirk Adams said there would be little support among fellow Republicans to weaken the law.Attorneys have begun reviewing the statute to identify possible changes, he said: “It’s embryonic.”Sen. Russell Pearce, the law’s chief sponsor, said he would only back changes to make it stronger.

Even though the law’s critics scored a huge victory with the judge’s decision, passions among hundreds of immigrant rights supporters still flared at demonstrations near the federal courthouse in downtown Phoenix after the parts of the law that weren’t blocked took effect Thursday. At least 70 people have been arrested.The law’s supporters reacted too, and a fund set up to help defend the measure added $75,000 Wednesday alone, giving the state more than $1.6 million to get Bolton’s ruling overturned.Meanwhile, hundreds of emails and phone calls including some threats have poured into the courthouse.

Federal officials in charge of court security wouldn’t say whether anyone made a death threat against Bolton and wouldn’t provide specifics of the threats they were examining. But a majority of the emails and phone calls to the judge’s chambers and the court clerk’s office are from people who want to complain about her ruling, officials said.”We understand that people will vent and have a First Amendment right to express their dissatisfaction. We expect this,” said David Gonzales, the U.S. marshal for Arizona. “But we want to look at the people who go over the line.”

Arizona sheriff Arpaio forges ahead with aggressive immigration sweeps even after court ruling

PHOENIX Lost in the hoopla over Arizona’s immigration law is the fact that state and local authorities for years have been doing their own aggressive crackdowns in the busiest illegal gateway into the country.Nowhere in the U.S. is local enforcement more present than in metropolitan Phoenix, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio routinely carries out sweeps, some in Hispanic neighborhoods, to arrest illegal immigrants. The tactics have made him the undisputed poster boy for local immigration enforcement and the anger that so many authorities feel about the issue.

“It’s my job,” said Arpaio, standing beside a sheriff’s truck that has a number for an immigration hot line written on its side. “I have two state (immigration) laws that I am enforcing. It’s not federal, it’s state.”A ruling Wednesday by a federal judge put on hold parts of the new law that would have required officers to dig deeper into the fight against illegal immigration. Arizona says it was forced to act because the federal government isn’t doing its job to fight immigration.

The issue led to demonstrations across the country Thursday, including one directed at Arpaio in Phoenix in which protesters beat on the metal door of a jail and chanted, “Sheriff Joe, we are here. We will not live in fear.”Meanwhile, Gov. Jan Brewer’s lawyers went to court to overturn the judge’s ruling so they can fight back against what the Republican calls an “invasion” of illegal immigrants.

Ever since the main flow of illegal immigrants into the country shifted to Arizona a decade ago, state politicians and local police have been feeling pressure to confront the state’s border woes.In addition to Arpaio’s crackdowns, other efforts include a steady stream of busts by the state and local police of stash houses where smugglers hide illegal immigrants. The state attorney general has taken a money-wiring company to civil court on allegations that smugglers used their service to move money to Mexico. And a county south of Phoenix has its sheriff’s deputies patrol dangerous smuggling corridors.The Arizona Legislature have enacted a series of tough-on-immigration measures in recent years that culminated with the law signed by Brewer in April, catapulting the Republican to the national political stage.

But the king of local immigration enforcement is still Arpaio.Arpaio, a 78-year-old ex-federal drug agent who fashions himself as a modern-day John Wayne, launched his latest sweep Thursday afternoon, sending about 200 sheriff’s deputies and trained volunteers out across metro Phoenix to look for traffic violators who may be here illegally.

Deputy Bob Dalton and volunteer Heath Kowacz spotted a driver with a cracked windshield in a poor Phoenix neighborhood near a busy freeway. Dalton triggered the red and blue police lights and pulled over 28-year-old Alfredo Salas, who was born in Mexico but has lived in Phoenix with a resident alien card since 1993.

Dalton gave him a warning after Salas produced his license and registration and told him to get the windshield fixed.Salas, a married father of two who installs granite, told The Associated Press that he was treated well but he wondered whether he was pulled over because his truck is a Ford Lobo.

“It’s a Mexican truck so I don’t know if they saw that and said, ‘I wonder if he has papers or not,'” Salas said. “If that’s the case, it kind of gets me upset.”Sixty percent of the nearly 1,000 people arrested in the sweeps since early 2008 have been illegal immigrants. Thursday’s dragnet led to four arrests, but it wasn’t clear if any of them were illegal immigrants.Critics say deputies racially profile Hispanics. Arpaio says deputies approach people only when they have probable cause.

“Sheriff Joe Arpaio and some other folks there decided they can make a name for themselves in terms of the intensity of the efforts they’re using,” said Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center. “There’s no way to deny that. There are a lot of people getting caught up in these efforts.”The Justice Department launched an investigation of his office nearly 17 months ago over allegations of discrimination and unconstitutional searches and seizures. Although the department has declined to detail its investigation, Arpaio believes it centers on his sweeps.

Arpaio feels no reservations about continuing to push the sweeps, even after the federal government stripped his power to let 100 deputies make federal immigration arrests.Unable to make arrests under a federal statute, the sheriff instead relied on a nearly 5-year-old state law that prohibits immigrant smuggling. He has also raided 37 businesses in enforcing a state law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants.”I’m not going to brag,” Arpaio said. “Just look at the record. I’m doing what I feel is right for the people of Maricopa County.” (AP)

Yovani Gallardo is firm. Even if he's fortunate enough to make the All-Star team again next summer, he'll skip it."If the game is in Arizona

ANAHEIM, Calif. Yovani Gallardo is firm. Even if he’s fortunate enough to make the All-Star team again next summer, he’ll skip it.”If the game is in Arizona, I will totally boycott,” the Milwaukee Brewers pitcher said Monday.A year before Phoenix is set to host baseball’s big event, the state’s new immigration law kept drawing the attention of major leaguers.Kansas City reliever Joakim Soria, who leads the majors with 25 saves, said he would support a Latino protest and stay away. Detroit closer Jose Valverde can see himself steering clear, too.”It’s a really delicate issue,” said Toronto outfielder Jose Bautista, who leads the majors with 24 home runs. “Hopefully, there are some changes in the law before then. We have to back up our Latin communities.”

“If I do get chosen, I don’t know what I’m going to do,” he said.About three dozen protesters held signs Monday one block from the hotel where Major League Baseball held its welcoming news conferences. The demonstrators said they had over 100,000 petitions asking commissioner Bud Selig to move the 2011 All-Star game out of Arizona.Another protest was planned outside Angel Stadium before Tuesday night’s game.

Selig has not spoken directly on the subject. Asked in May about calls to shift next year’s game, he gave a defense of baseball’s minority hiring record. Selig did not take questions at Monday’s All-Star introductory event.Arizona’s much-debated measure takes effect July 29. The statute requires police, while enforcing other laws, to ask about a person’s immigration status if there is reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.”They could stop me and ask to see my papers,” Soria said. “I have to stand with my Latin community on this.”

The Mexican-born Gallardo said he’s talked with Soria and San Diego’s All-Star first baseman Adrian Gonzalez about the Arizona law.”We don’t agree with it,” Gallardo said. St. Louis slugger Albert Pujols said he opposed the law and Valverde called it “dumb.”

Several All-Stars avoided the topic.”That’s a political thing,” New York Yankees second baseman Robinson Cano said. “I don’t have anything to say about it. They already made a decision. If I say anything it’s not going to make any difference.””Wrong guy,” teammate Alex Rodriguez said, pointing to other players in the interview room.

Los Angeles Dodgers shortstop Rafael Furcal said he would wait for guidance from the players’ union.”The game is going on at this point, regardless,” said former All-Star Tony Clark, who played for Arizona last season and now works for the union. “Whatever decision an individual player makes, they would have the full support of the union.”The union has already condemned the law and said that if it is not repealed or modified additional steps would be considered.

Oakland closer Andrew Bailey, whose team holds spring training in Phoenix, said his sport was caught in a crossfire.”The Arizona Diamondbacks and Major League Baseball had nothing to do with making the Arizona immigration laws,” he said. “I know there are discrepancies. Hopefully, things can get resolved.”(AP) —

Arizona police officials warned officers not to use race or ethnicity when enforcing the state's new immigration law

PHOENIX Arizona police officials warned officers not to use race or ethnicity when enforcing the state’s new immigration law, saying that the country is watching their every move.In a new training video released Thursday, the officials said opponents of the law may secretly videotape officers making traffic stops, trying to ensnare them and prove that they’re racially profiling Hispanics.”Without a doubt, we’re going to be accused of racial profiling no matter what we do on this,” Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor tells officers on the video from Arizona’s police licensing board. The video is designed to teach officers how to determine when they can ask a person for proof they’re in the country legally.Officers can consider that someone doesn’t speak English well, is wearing several layers of clothing in a hot climate or is hanging out in an area where illegal immigrants are known to look for work, according to the video.

They can take into account that a person doesn’t have identification, tried to run away, is traveling in an overcrowded vehicle, or seems out of place and unfamiliar with the area.But the stakes for making a mistake are high: Officers can be fired if they start asking questions because of a person’s race, then lie about it later, the video warns.”It is also clear that the actions of Arizona officers will never come under this level of scrutiny again,” said Lyle Mann, executive director of the training agency. “Each and every one of you will now carry the reputation for the entire Arizona law enforcement community with you every day.

“Arizona’s law, sparked by anger over a surging population of illegal immigrants in the border state, generally requires officers enforcing another law to question a person’s immigration status if there’s a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.Officers are told that the law applies only to a stop, detention or arrest – not when a person flags down an officer. Police are not required to ask crime victims or witnesses about their status, and anyone who shows a valid Arizona driver’s license is presumed to be in the country legally.The law restricts the use of race, color or national origin as the basis for triggering immigration questions.

But civil rights groups and some police officials argue that officers will still assume that illegal immigrants look Hispanic.Arizona’s 460,000 illegal immigrants are almost all Hispanic. Yet Arizona also has nearly 2 million Hispanics who are U.S. citizens or legal residents, about 30 percent of the state’s population.In the training video, an expert advises officers to ask themselves whether they’d reach the same conclusion about a Hispanic person’s immigration status if the subject were white or black.”If any officer goes into a situation with a previous mindset that one race or one ethnicity is not equal to another’s, then they have no business being a law enforcement officer in this state,” Arizona Police Association president Brian Livingston says in the video.

The video and supporting paperwork will be sent to all 170 Arizona police agencies.Police bosses will decide the best way to teach their forces. There is no requirement that all 15,000 Arizona police officers complete the training before the law takes effect July 29.Gov. Jan Brewer ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to develop the training when she signed the law April 23.Opponents have challenged the measure as unconstitutional and have asked that a federal court block it from taking effect. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton plans to hear arguments on the request later this month.

President Barack Obama on Thursday called the law an understandable byproduct of public frustration with the government’s inability to tighten the system, but also said it is ill-conceived, divisive and would put undue pressure on local authorities.

The law was passed in part with the lobbying muscle of unions representing rank-and-file police officers who argued that they should be allowed to arrest illegal immigrants they come across.It was opposed by police bosses who worried it would be expensive to implement and would destroy the trust they’ve developed in Hispanic neighborhoods. (AP)

Hillary Rodham Clinton that the Obama administration will sue the state over its new immigration law

PHOENIX Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said Thursday she’s angry over comments by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the Obama administration will sue the state over its new immigration law.In a June 8 media interview in Ecuador that began circulating Thursday in the U.S., Clinton said President Barack Obama thinks the federal government should determine immigration policy and that the Justice Department “will be bringing a lawsuit against the act.”Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler on Thursday declined to say whether the department would sue and that “the department continues to review the law.”

The department has been looking at the law for weeks for possible civil rights violations, with an eye toward a possible court challenge.It’s unclear why Clinton made the comment since it’s not her area. She couldn’t be reached Thursday for comment.State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Obama and Clinton have both made it clear that the administration opposes the law.

“I will defer to the Justice Department on the legal steps that are available and where they stand on the review of the law,” Crowley said. “The secretary believes that comprehensive immigration reform is a better course of action.”Brewer, a Republican, said in a statement that “this is no way to treat the people of Arizona.”

“To learn of this lawsuit through an Ecuadorean interview with the secretary of state is just outrageous,” she said. “If our own government intends to sue our state to prevent illegal immigration enforcement, the least it can do is inform us before it informs the citizens of another nation.”Brewer spokesman Paul Senseman said the governor was “outraged” and that Clinton’s comments make it appear that the Justice Department has decided to file suit.

“But she’s confident that in the end, the state of Arizona, the citizens, will prevail,” he said.On April 23, Brewer signed what is considered the toughest legislation in the nation targeting illegal immigrants. It is set to go into effect July 29 pending multiple legal challenges and the Justice Department’s review.

The law requires police investigating another incident or crime to ask people about their immigration status if there’s a “reasonable suspicion” they’re in the country illegally. It also makes being in Arizona illegally a misdemeanor, and it prohibits seeking day-labor work along the state’s streets.The law’s stated intention is to drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona and discourage them from coming in the first place. It has outraged civil rights groups, drawn criticism from Obama and led to marches and protests organized by people on both sides of the issue.

The law’s backers say Congress isn’t doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it’s the state’s duty to address the issue. Critics say it will lead to racial profiling and discrimination against Hispanics, and damage ties between police and minority communities.Brewer met with Obama in the Oval Office about the law on June 3, telling him: “We want our border secured.” Obama reiterated his objections to the law. Neither side appeared to give ground although both talked about seeking a bipartisan solution.

Other Arizona politicians, political candidates and activist groups were quick to weigh in on Clinton’s remarks. U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Hayworth, who is challenging Sen. John McCain, called them appalling; attorney general candidates Tom Horne and Andrew Thomas also denounced them.Joanne Lin, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, urged the administration to take swift action against the law.(AP)

Arizona lawmaker takes aim at automatic citizenship

PHOENIX  Emboldened by passage of the nation’s toughest law against illegal immigration, the Arizona politician who sponsored the measure now wants to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in this country to undocumented parents.Legal scholars laugh out loud at Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce’s proposal and warn that it would be blatantly unconstitutional, since the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone born in the U.S.

But Pearce brushes aside such concerns. And given the charged political atmosphere in Arizona, and public anger over what many regard as a failure by the federal government to secure the border, some politicians think the idea has a chance of passage.”I think the time is right,” said state Rep. John Kavanagh, a Republican from suburban Phoenix who is chairman of the powerful House Appropriations Committee. “Federal inaction is unacceptable, so the states have to start the process.”

Earlier this year, the Legislature set off a storm of protests around the country when it passed a law that directs police to check the immigration status of anyone they suspect is in the country illegally. The law also makes it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant. The measure, which takes effect July 29 unless blocked in court, has inflamed the national debate over immigration and led to boycotts against the state.

An estimated 10.8 million illegal immigrants were living in the U.S. as of January 2009, according to the Homeland Security Department. The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that as of 2008, there were 3.8 million illegal immigrants in this country whose children are U.S. citizens.

Pearce, who has yet to draft the legislation, proposes that the state of Arizona no longer issue birth certificates unless at least one parent can prove legal status. He contends that the practice of granting citizenship to anyone born in the U.S. encourages illegal immigrants to come to this country to give birth and secure full rights for their children.”We create the greatest inducement for breaking our laws,” he said.

The 14th Amendment, adopted in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War, reads: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.” But Pearce argues that the amendment was meant to protect black people.”It’s been hijacked and abused,” he said. “There is no provision in the 14th Amendment for the declaration of citizenship to children born here to illegal aliens.”

John McGinnis, a conservative law professor at Northwestern University, said Pearce’s interpretation is “just completely wrong.” The “plain meaning” of the amendment is clear, he said.Senate candidate Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican and darling of the tea party movement, made headlines last month after he told a Russian TV station that he favors denying citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants.

A similar bill was introduced at the federal level in 2009 by former Rep. Nathan Deal, a Georgia Republican, but it has gone nowhere.The Federation for American Immigration Reform, based in Washington, said Pearce’s idea would stop immigrants from traveling to the U.S. to give birth.

“Essentially we are talking about people who have absolutely no connection whatever with this country,” spokesman Ira Mehlman said. “The whole idea of citizenship means that you have some connection other than mere happenstance that you were born on U.S. soil.”Citizenship as a birthright is rare elsewhere in the world. Many countries require at least one parent to be a citizen or legal resident.

Adopting such a practice in the U.S. would be not only unconstitutional but also impractical and expensive, said Michele Waslin, a policy analyst with the pro-immigrant Immigration Policy Center in Washington.”Every single parent who has a child would have to go through this bureaucratic process of proving their own citizenship and therefore proving their child’s citizenship,” she said.

Araceli Viveros, 27, and her husband, Saul, 34, are illegal immigrants from the Mexican state of Guerrero. He has been in Phoenix for 20 years, she for 10, and their 2- and 9-year-old children are U.S. citizens.”I am so proud my children were born here. They can learn English and keep studying,” Viveros said in Spanish.

She said her husband has been working hard in Phoenix as a landscaper, and their children deserve to be citizens. The lawmaker’s proposal “is very bad,” she said. “It’s changing the Constitution, and some children won’t have the same rights as other children.”(AP)

All Star Game boycott sought to protest Arizona law

The only Latino in the Senate urged Major League Baseball players on Monday to boycott the 2011 All-Star game in Arizona to protest the state’s tough new immigration law.”The Arizona law is offensive to Hispanics and all Americans because it codifies racial profiling into law by requiring police to question anyone who appears to be in the country illegally,” New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez wrote Michael Weiner, executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association.

Menendez, who chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, is the only Latino in the 100-member chamber. In his letter, he noted more than 1 in 4 players are Latinos.Signed into law last month by Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer, the law requires state and local police, after making “lawful contact,” to check the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect is in the country illegally.The measure has prompted a number of calls for boycotts of businesses in the state, amid charges that it is unconstitutional and a mandate for racial profiling.

Representative Jose Serrano, a New York Democrat, and some Latino organizations have called upon MLB Commissioner Bud Selig to move the All-Star game, which is scheduled to be played in July 2011 in Phoenix, Arizona’s state capital. A Major League Baseball spokesman could not be immediately reached for comment.Calls for a sporting boycott of Arizona began soon after Brewer signed the bill into law on April 23. A group of protesters turned out to picket the Diamondbacks, the state’s Major League baseball team, at a game in Chicago.

The new law has reignited calls for Congress to overhaul the U.S. immigration system, and Menendez joined two fellow Senate Democrats last month in unveiling a “draft” plan.But lawmakers from both parties appear reluctant to tackle the emotional issue months before November’s congressional elections.

‘HUMILIATION AND HARASSMENT’

Almost two-thirds of Arizona voters and a majority of voters nationwide support the law, which backers say is needed to curb violence and crime stemming from illegal immigration in the Mexico border state.

In late April, Brewer signed changes to the law that she said made it “crystal clear” racial profiling was illegal. However, a recent poll of Hispanic voters in Arizona found that 85 percent felt that Latinos who are legal immigrants or U.S. citizens were likely to be stopped or questioned by police.In his letter, Menendez wrote that Latino players come to the United States legally “and should not be subjected to the humiliation and harassment that (the new law) would inflict” on them during their visit to the state for the All-Star game.”Imagine if your players and their families were subjected to interrogation by law enforcement, simply because they look a certain way,” the senator added.

Menendez said, “the Arizona law is an embarrassment to our country and a call to action to our communities to stand up against injustice.””For these reasons, I ask that you consider boycotting the All-Star Game in Arizona until SB1070 (the new law) is repealed, or the League decides to move the game to an alternate location,” Menendez wrote.(Reuters)

immigration to be one factor that is very complicated problem for McCain in election

Reporting from Mesa, Arizona .As a candidate for president, Republican John McCain lamented his party’s tough talk on illegal immigration. “In the long term, if you alienate the Hispanics, you’ll pay a heavy price,” he told a group of Milwaukee businessmen in October 2006.Back then, some strongly favored walling off the U.S. Mexico border to address the problem, but not McCain. “I think the fence is least effective,” the Arizona senator said.

Lately, however, McCain has transformed himself from a champion of broadbased reform — who spoke of illegal immigrants as “God’s children,” deserving of love and compassion — into a fierce advocate for the kind of crackdown he once scorned.In a recent TV ad, McCain blamed illegal immigrants for all manner of problems facing his state: “smuggling, home invasions, murder.” It is time, he said, for Washington to “complete the danged fence.”Facing his toughest reelection fight in years, McCain’s future may hinge on whether voters see him as honest or opportunistic.

Old allies are dismayed. “Someone who was a visionary … has gone from being very large to very, very small,” said Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez (DIll.), who worked with McCain and the late Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on a bipartisan immigration overhaul bill.Old foes are dismissive. Among them is former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, McCain’s main rival in the August primary and a longtime adversary. “An electionyear conversion,” Hayworth said.

The more important verdict, however, rests with voters like Linda StapleyWilliams, 60, a retired high school teacher and GOP activist in Mesa. She wonders: “Did he change his position as he was exposed to new information? Because that can be an admirable thing. Or did he change his opinion because the outcry was so overwhelming and there was no way he was going to get reelected if he didn’t?”

McCain — who holds a comfortable, if not overwhelming, lead in polls — declined to be interviewed. Last month he told the Arizona Republic it was “a political ploy” to say he changed his immigration stance.For years, McCain criticized Washington for failing to control the border, pushed for stiffer law enforcement and worked to pry federal dollars loose to help Arizona pay the costs of illegal immigration. But that was only part of the solution, he said many times.

“Congress cannot take a piecemeal approach to a national security crisis,” McCain said in a Senate floor speech in September 2006. “I believe the only way to truly secure our border and protect our nation is through the enactment of comprehensive immigration reform.”Working with Democrats, McCain introduced an enforcement bill in 2005 that included a guestworker program and a provision allowing citizenship for illegal immigrants who learned English, paid a fine, underwent background checks and waited several years before seeking permanent residence.

The legislation was strongly backed by President George W. Bush and passed the Senate with bipartisan support. But the measure drew fierce criticism from grassroots Republicans angry at what they considered amnesty. The bill was killed in the House.Even so, McCain’s coauthorship continues to antagonize many back home.

On a recent hot afternoon, a group of seven GOP women gathered in Mesa over cold drinks to talk about McCain. All were pleased with his harder line, including support for Arizona’s stringent new law against illegal immigration — though some found him more believable than others. None would consider voting for McCain had he not repudiated the 2005 immigration bill.”That’s a dealbreaker,” said Sharon Giese, 63, one of two Arizona representatives on the Republican National Committee. Others nodded.

Mesa typifies the changes in Arizona over the last decade or so, with its explosive growth and influx of Latinos. Once a faroff satellite of Phoenix, Mesa has become the state’s thirdmost populous city, with about 460,000 residents. (That’s more than Cleveland or Miami.)Much of the community has the feel of an upscale oasis. Broad streets, laid out in the grid pattern favored by Mesa’s Mormon founders, are lined with tidy subdivisions and earthtoned shopping centers, a cool mist drifting from the redtile rooftops.

But the heavily Latino neighborhoods near downtown show all the signs of incipient urban decay: empty homes, slashes of graffiti, bars on windows, weeds poking through cracked sidewalks.Since taking a harder line on illegal immigration, the Arizona senator’s future may hinge on whether voters see him as honest or opportunistic.Mesa’s Latino population soared over the last decade, three times faster than the total population, to more than 115,000 residents. Today, 1 in 4 people living in Mesa is Latino, up from 1 in 5 in 2000, according to Tony Sissons, a Phoenix demographics expert.But the Republican women were adamant their support for tough border enforcement has nothing to do with race. Rather, they said, it has everything to do with following the law.

“I feel for the people in Mexico because I know they want the best for the families,” said Heather Sandstrom, 52, a retired TV newscaster. “I think it’s great if they want to immigrate here…. We’d love to have you. But do it legally.”McCain used to say the same thing. In recent months, however, he has made the kind of provocative statements he once condemned. Instead of lamenting the “human tragedy” of illegal bordercrossers dying in the desert, as he did in 2008, he accuses undocumented foreigners of deliberately crashing into other cars — apparently so they can flee when pursuing officers stop to tend accident victims.

“Arizona is under siege in many respects,” McCain said in a recent Fox News appearance. “We have broken borders. We have people flooding across. We have drug cartels inflicting incredible damage.”In fact, statistics suggest that Arizona is safer than it was in the 1990s, when the tide of illegal immigration began to surge. New FBI figures rate Phoenix as one of the four safest big cities in America. From 2008 to 2009, data show, violent and property crimes fell nearly 9% in Mesa and surrounding suburbs.

For many, however, the numbers don’t compute; the news is filled with crime stories linked to suspected illegal immigration or drug trafficking: the killing of a cattle rancher near the Mexico border, the shooting of a sheriff’s deputy in Pinal County.

The Republican women lamented the changes they have seen over the last few years: more day laborers hustling on more street corners, schools increasingly burdened by children who can’t speak English, hospitals filled with illegal immigrants receiving free medical care.”It’s just not fair,” said retiree Carol Jacobsen, 71, who moved to Arizona from the Midwest in 2001. “They’re getting a free ride.”

In 2007, McCain and Kennedy tried to reach agreement on a new immigration bill. By then, McCain was seeking the GOP presidential nomination and being pummeled for his immigration stance; his campaign nearly collapsed that summer, about the same time overhaul efforts died on Capitol Hill.Although McCain rallied to win the nomination, the outcry convinced him that border security had to be addressed before other steps could be considered.

Some who worked with McCain on comprehensive legislation hope he will resume talks once the election is past. (Assuming he wins.) “I don’t think this has staying power with him, mentally or in his heart,” Gutierrez said of McCain’s current position.

That’s what worries Son Hee Williamson, who emigrated legally, she stresses from South Korea nearly 40 years ago. She likes the senator’s tougher approach to illegal immigration. “But I don’t know if he’s going to keep that promise” if reelected, the GOP activist said.She is still deciding who to support in August.

Gov. Jan Brewer has removed the state's attorney general from defending Arizona's new immigration-enforcement law

PHOENIX Gov. Jan Brewer has removed the state’s attorney general from defending Arizona’s new immigration-enforcement law, accusing him of colluding with the U.S. Justice Department as it weighs whether to challenge the law in court.Brewer, a Republican, said she took action after state Attorney General Terry Goddard, a Democrat and her potential challenger for re-election, met Friday with Justice Department lawyers, who then met with her legal advisers.

Goddard, who has publicly stated he opposes the law but vowed to defend the state in court as its chief lawyer, said he told the Justice Department team “we need solutions from Washington, not more lawsuits.”Brewer expressed similar sentiments after her legal advisers met with the federal lawyers, vowing to defend the state to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

But she accused Goddard of a lack of resolve on immigration matters and called his meeting with the Justice Department team a “curious coordination.”The immigration law she signed gave her the power to coordinate the state’s legal defense because the Legislature saw a “lack of confidence” in Goddard’s willingness to defend the law, she said.

The U.S. attorney general, Eric Holder Jr., is nearing a decision on whether to challenge the law, which gives the state and local police broad authority to enforce federal immigration law. It allows the police to check the immigration status of people they suspect are illegal immigrants whom they have stopped for another reason.Holder has said he worries the law may intrude on federal immigration authority and lead to profiling. On Thursday he met with police chiefs who oppose the law as divisive and a detriment to getting immigrants to report crime and cooperate with criminal investigations.

Meanwhile, thousands from around the country marched to the state capital, Phoenix, on Saturday to protest the new law, set to become effective July 29.Opponents of the law suspended their boycott against Arizona and bused in protesters from around the country.Midtown Phoenix buzzed with protesters carrying signs and American flags. Dozens of police officers were on standby along the route of the five-mile march, and helicopters hovered overhead.

Supporters of the law expected to draw thousands to a rally of their own later Saturday at a baseball stadium in suburban Tempe, encouraging like-minded Americans to “buycott” Arizona by planning vacations in the state.Some opponents of the law have encouraged people to cancel conventions in the state and avoid doing business with Arizona-based companies, hoping the economic pressure forces lawmakers to repeal the law.But Alfredo Gutierrez, chairman of the boycott committee of Hispanic civil-rights group Somos America, said the boycott doesn’t apply to people coming to resist the law. Opponents said they secured warehouse space for people to sleep on cots instead of staying in hotels.

“The point was to be here for this march to show support for these folks, then we’re out,” said Jose Vargas, a union representative for New York City teachers. “We’re not spending a dime here.”Supporters of the law sought to counteract the economic damage of boycotts by bringing supporters into the state.

“Arizona, we feel, is America’s Alamo in the fight against illegal and dangerous entry into the United States,” said Gina Loudon of St. Louis, who is organizing the “buycott.””Our border guards and all of Arizona law enforcement are the undermanned, undergunned, taxed-to-the-limit front-line defenders trying to hold back the invasion,” she said.

Obama, you went back on your promise to promote family values,said Michael Chavez of Houston

Opponents of Arizona’s new immigration law had a message for President Barack Obama at a rally Saturday at the Capitol in Austin.”Obama, you went back on your promise to promote family values,” said Michael Chavez of Houston.
“Deporting and separating family members is not an American value,” he said. Arizona’s immigration law, known as SB 1070, makes being an illegal immigrant a state crime and requires legal immigrants to carry papers that confirm their legal status.

Chavez, a veteran, said that people should remember Mexican immigrants are fighting for the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan. Several generations of his family have fought for the United States, including his grandfather, who fought in World War II, and his son, who just returned from Iraq, he said.The rally  National Day of Action Against SB 1070  drew a few hundred people, in contrast to the thousands of people who attended a rally at the Capitol against SB 1070 on May 1.

Many supporters in Austin went to Phoenix to participate in the protest there Saturday, said Amalia Martinez, a member of the Austin Immigrant Rights Coalition.Speakers at the rally said Obama should have already pushed the immigration reform he promised in his campaign through Congress.”If he wants to be re-elected, he needs to stop SB 1070,” Martinez said.

People from Houston, Dallas, San Antonio and even Phoenix came to the rally in Austin.Justine Hecht said she and her boyfriend, Joe Sawinski, both from Phoenix, were just passing through Austin on a trip when they decided to come to the rally.They had already protested against the law in Arizona, but they said it was easier to express their views in Austin.”There’s just so much tension in Arizona right now,” Hecht said.

About 11 members from the Southwest Public Workers Union in San Antonio attended the rally, including Chavel Lopez, who said the Arizona law is racist.Jeff Gillum, who also attended the rally, said he supported Arizona’s law.”Immigrants have put a drain on health care and law enforcement,” Gillum said.The Austin City Council decided May 13 to end its business and travel ties with Arizona to protest the new law.Speakers at Austin’s rally Saturday said some Texas state legislators wanted to pass the same law as Arizona.”We will stop it in Texas, and we will stop it in Arizona,” said Gloria Rubac of Houston.”This is a civil rights issue for all of us.”