The Arizona governor’s decision Wednesday to veto a bill widely seen as pitting religious protections against gay rights puts an end to two controversial amendments proposed by lawmakers.RELATED: Tea Party Leader: Arizona Veto Enslaves Christians into Baking Giant Penis Cakes
But it leaves standing the state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which continues to empower individuals to sue when they believe state or local laws – including antidiscrimination laws – are violating their religious rights.
In announcing her decision to veto the amendments, known as SB 1062, Gov. Jan Brewer (R) said that religious liberty is valued in Arizona. She added that the state also values the principle of nondiscrimination.
How those two goals coexist in Arizona in the future remains unclear. But it is clear from the governor’s veto that the potential downside of following through with the amendments outweighed the advantages.
“I sincerely believe that SB 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve,” she said in a brief statement.
While the Brewer veto ends the current dispute in a way that appears to deliver a clear victory to gay rights advocates and their supporters, the underlying causes of the conflict remain unresolved.
On one side are Arizona residents seeking to live their lives in accord with traditional moral positions embraced in the Bible’s Old Testament – positions that condemn homosexuality. On the other side are gay men, lesbians, bisexual, and transsexual individuals fighting for equal rights and equal dignity in communities they also call home.
The Arizona Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) seeks to protect religious faith from coercive laws. That protection continues to exist throughout Arizona.
What is changing is a growing recognition of civil rights for gay Americans that is clashing with traditional religious teachings. For example, Arizona law offers no protection against discrimination based on sexual orientation, but three Arizona cities – Phoenix, Tucson, and Flagstaff – have passed ordinances banning sexual orientation discrimination in their jurisdictions.
The two proposed amendments to the Arizona RFRA were an attempt to address the issue in a way that favored religious adherents. Brewer’s veto eliminates the attempt, but it does nothing to address the underlying clash.
The veto was issued amid a growing controversy in Arizona over what had been a little-noticed state law patterned on a 21-year-old federal statute designed to shield religious adherents from government measures that violate their beliefs.
The original Religious Freedom Restoration Act, far from a hate-inspired antigay measure, sailed through the US House of Representatives on a voice vote and passed the US Senate 97 to 3 before being signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton in 1993.
The law was written to fill a vacuum left after the US Supreme Court embraced a significantly narrower reading of the protections of religious liberty under the First Amendment’s free exercise of religion clause. Congress responded with RFRA.
Arizona Governor Jan Brewer made a statement Wednesday night declaring she already vetoed the controversial SB1062 bill that would permit state businesses to discriminate against LGBT individuals, confirming an earlier report that she was planning to veto the bill.RELATED: 7 Myths About Arizona's Religious Freedom Law
Advocates of the bill have argued that the bill was meant to protect people’s religious liberty, while opponents insisted it’s just the government adding on another layer of discrimination that gay people have to face in their lives.
Brewer previously pledged she would “do the right thing for Arizona,” and deferred questions by saying she had until Friday to make her decision. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce came out against the bill, as did many businesses (Apple and Marriott among them), and a number of high-profile Republicans, including both of Arizona’s GOP senators, called on Brewer to veto the bill.
On Monday, Fox & Friends hosted a panel discussion about how the major networks have covered the Arizona immigration law, which was recently partially upheld by the Supreme Court, and the Fast and Furious gun walking scandal. The panel concluded that the major networks had reported those stories in a biased fashion.RELATED: Supreme Court immigration ruling: A win for Arizona, a call to action for Congress
Fill-in host Alisyn Camerota opened the panel by playing a clip of Univision anchor Jorge Ramos speaking with ABC News anchor Diane Sawyer about Arizona’s controversial immigration law.
“This is a very sad day for the Hispanic community,” said Ramos on Monday when the Supreme Court left one key provision of that law in place. “This would only create more persecution and discrimination in Arizona and in many other states.”
“Was that an objective report by an anchor,” Camerota asked her panel guests.
“It’s not that Jorge Ramos is opinionated, he’s simply wrong,” said former George W. Bush Labor Secretary nominee Linda Chavez.
Camerota asked if her panel found it surprising that ABC News would allow Univision’s opinion without an opposing view on their network news broadcast.
“Nothing surprises me anymore in the media,” said Jon-Christopher Bua, a U.S. political analysis for Sky News.
“I think it is tragic when people are relying on listening to news, you know, at the dinner table and they’re getting somebody’s opinion,” Interjected Tamara Holder, Fox News legal analyst. “What makes Fox great is that you get crazy people like me on the left giving an opinion and other people who are giving just the news. And there needs to be a separation.”
Camerota said that the network broadcasts have largely ignored the Fast and Furious scandal and, those networks that have covered the story, did so briefly until “other, lesser stories have eclipsed it.”
“Is it newsworthy,” asked Camerota.
“Of course it’s newsworthy,” replied Chavez. “And the irony is, President [Barack] Obama – by invoking executive privilege – has actually now forced this issue onto the major, mainstream media.”
Holder said that it is not uncommon for House committee votes to not make it onto the news – which is what Attorney General Eric Holder’s contempt citation remains at this stage.
The Supreme Court announced Monday it will hear a challenge to Arizona's controversial immigration law, setting up another high-profile decision for the court's coming term.
Arizona asked the court to allow the state to enforce legislation that has been blocked after being challenged by the Obama administration, including provisions that would enable police officers to question a person's immigration status if they suspect the person is in the country illegally. The law would also make it a crime to not carry proof of legal immigration status, make it against state law for an illegal immigrant to seek employment, and allow police to detain those suspected of being illegal immigrants without a warrant.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked each of those provisions in April.
“I would like to commend the U.S. Supreme Court for its decision to review and hear arguments pertaining to the federal court injunction," said Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer in a statement Monday. "I am confident the High Court will uphold Arizona’s constitutional authority and obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens."
The undertaking by the court will be the second high-profile case expected to be decided in the heat of the 2012 presidential campaign. Arguments are expected in April, with a decision in early summer.
The court is also primed to consider the constitutional challenge to the individual mandate in President Obama's healthcare reform law.
Justice Elena Kagan said Monday that she would recuse herself from the challenge to Arizona's controversial immigration law, presumably because she served as Obama's solicitor general when the federal government filed the original lawsuit against the state.
Her recusal opens up the possibility for a rare 4-4 split on the court; since a lower court blocked provisions of the law, the tie would uphold that ruling and function as a win for the Obama administration. But the court would not be able to settle the larger issue of whether the Arizona statute is constitutional in the event of tie.
The Justice Department has contended that regulating immigration is a federal responsibility, and has fought the Arizona law and similar variations in Alabama, South Carolina and Utah.
“Arizonans are understandably frustrated with illegal immigration, and the federal government has a responsibility to comprehensively address those concerns,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement earlier this year. “But diverting federal resources away from dangerous aliens such as terrorism suspects and aliens with criminal records will impact the entire country’s safety. Setting immigration policy and enforcing immigration laws is a national responsibility. Seeking to address the issue through a patchwork of state laws will only create more problems than it solves.”
Arizona has argued that the federal government hasn't done enough to prevent illegal immigration, however, and that border states are experiencing higher crime and economic consequences.
In an exclusive Newsmax interview, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich backs Arizona’s new immigration law and says Gov. Jan Brewer “ought to promptly file suit against the federal government to make them pay for all the costs that Arizona’s dealing with — costs in schools, costs in prisons, costs in hospitals. If the federal government’s basis of it’s lawsuit is that it has sole responsibility, then it ought to have sole responsibility. If I were [Gov. Brewer], I’d present them with a bill for several billion dollars on behalf of the people of Arizona who are currently suffering because eof the incompetence and failure of the federal government.”
This is a win-lose for both the Obama administration and Gov. Jan Brewer. The judge struck down the most controversial parts of SB1070: illegals having to walk around with their papers and cops being able people's immigration status. Then too, while the ruling is a temporary injunction, if you read the whole thing Judge Susan Bolton seems to think that the DOJ has made enough of a case that could see the law blocked in its entirety. A key win for Jan Brewer and all other opponents of illegal immigration is that a ban on so-called sanctuary cities stands, as does making it a crime to pick up day laborers who are illegal immigrants. The parts of the law dealing with sanctions for the hiring of illegal immigrants also goes into effect Thursday.A federal judge has blocked one of the most controversial sections of a tough Arizona immigration law, granting a preliminary injunction Wednesday that prevents police from questioning people about their immigration status.
That provision of the law requires police to "make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested" if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the United States illegally.
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton's ruling, in response to a motion filed by the federal government, came with scant hours to go before the law goes into effect.
She also blocked provisions of the law making it a crime to fail to apply for or carry alien registration papers or "for an unauthorized alien to solicit, apply for, or perform work," and a provision "authorizing the warrantless arrest of a person" if there is reason to believe that person might be subject to deportation.
A federal judge sharply questioned the Justice Department's key argument that Arizona's immigration law interferes with federal enforcement of immigration law.
"Why can't Arizona be as inhospitable as they wish to people who have entered or remained in the United States?" U.S. Judge Susan Bolton asked in Thursday's hearing, according to the Washington Post.
She also questioned the argument that federal law "pre-empts" (i.e. trumps) the Arizona statute.
"Where is the pre-emption if everybody who is arrested for some crime has their immigration status checked?"
But Bolton also suggested that making it a state crime to lack immigration documents could violate a Supreme Court ruling prohibiting states from creating their own "immigration registration systems," the Los Angeles Times reports.
The Justice Department is asking Bolton to bar the law from going into effect next week.
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.
President Obama intends to meet with Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer on Thursday, a White House official told FoxNews.com, after criticism mounted over the president's refusal to meet her while she is in Washington this week.
Brewer had requested a face-to-face meeting with Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, the former Arizona governor, as tensions rise between his administration and the Grand Canyon State over its controversial law clamping down on illegal immigrants.
White House spokesman Adam Abrams had said over the weekend that Obama's schedule "doesn't allow for a meeting" with Brewer but added that the president "does intend to sit down with the governor in the future."
The apparent snub came after Justice Department officials told Arizona's attorney general and aides to the governor Friday that the federal government has serious reservations about the state's new immigration law.
Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, a Republican who helped draft Arizona's SB 1070, called Obama's refusal to meet with Brewer "an insult."
President Obama has turned down Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer's request to meet while she's in Washington next week as tensions mount between his administration and Arizona over the state's new law cracking down on illegal immigrants.
Brewer will be in Washington to meet with other governors. She said Friday that she had asked to meet with Obama and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to discuss border security and immigration but Obama's schedule "doesn't allow for a meeting" with her, White House spokesman Adam Abrams said, adding that the president "does intend to sit down with the governor in the future."
When Obama returns from his Chicago vacation on Tuesday, he will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Peru President Alan Garcia at the White House. On Wednesday, Obama is meeting with Gen. Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, before heading to an event in Pittsburgh and hosting a concert at the White House to honor Paul McCartney.
On Thursday, Obama will speak at Secretary Clinton's reception for a new partnership between U.S. and India. On Friday, the president will welcome the Major League Soccer men's championship team, Real Salt Lake, to the White House.
The apparent snub comes after Justice Department officials told Arizona's attorney general and aides to the governor Friday that the federal government has serious reservations about the state's new immigration law. They responded that a lawsuit against the state isn't the answer.
Who knew that Kermit the Frog was this into politics. The campaign of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) has put out a video that features a frog puppet -- that looks much like the famous Sesame Street character -- to help sell the state's controversial immigration law.
The frog encourages opponents to read the immigration law before criticizing it.Some may scoff, but the law has boosted Brewer in the polls over her Democratic opponent, Terry Goddard.
In launching a Web site aimed at educating the United States on Arizona's controversial illegal immigration law, Governor Jan Brewer (R-Ariz.) took umbrage with the president's joke at the recent White House Correspondents' Dinner.
The event is an opportunity for its speakers to make light of politics, and President Barack Obama did so with Arizona's immigration law:
"We all know what happens in Arizona when you don't have ID -- adios, amigos."
It was this joke which became the target of Gov. Brewer's address regarding new steps the state government is taking to promote the law on a national level.
"It's fair to ask whether he intends to be the Commander-in-Chief or the Comic-in-Chief," Gov. Brewer said. "Since the president's joke was so inappropriate, I suppose, if I wanted to join in the comedian game, I could suggest that he should not give up his day job."
"Unfortunately, though, he isn't doing very well at that one, either," she added as her punchline. In the context of the Correspondents' Dinner, Mr. Obama's joke may not be seen by some as "so inappropriate." Gov. Brewer does not see the issue of border security as a joking matter, regardless of context.
Boycotts are just more politics and manipulation by out-of-state interests. As a border state, Arizona has already paid a heavy price for the federal government's failure -- hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in unreimbursed costs -- and its citizens should not be punished further.
It is critically important that all Americans understand the impetus for this new law and have a clear understanding of the law itself. Our neighbor to the south, Mexico, is in a massive battle with well-organized drug cartels. Because of Washington's failure to secure our southern border, Arizona has become the superhighway of illegal drug and human smuggling activity. In December 2008, the U.S. Justice Department said that Mexican gangs are the "biggest organized crime threat to the United States." In 2009, Phoenix had 316 kidnapping cases, turning the city into our nation's kidnapping capital. Almost all of the persons kidnapped were illegal immigrants or linked to the drug trade.
Essentially, our border leaks like a team with a last-place defense. The very same week that I signed the new law, a major drug ring was broken up and Mexican cartel operatives suspected of running 40,000 pounds of marijuana through southern Arizona were indicted.
While drug smuggling is the principal cause of our massive border-violence problem, many of the same criminal organizations also smuggle people. Busts of drop houses, where illegal immigrants are often held for ransom or otherwise severely abused, are not uncommon occurrences in Arizona neighborhoods.
Today, Arizona has approximately 6,000 prison inmates who are foreign nationals, representing a cost to our state of roughly $150 million per year. Arizona taxpayers are paying for a vast majority of these incarceration expenses because the federal government refuses to pay what it owes. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, as governor of Arizona, sent numerous requests to the federal government to pay for these prisoners -- only to be given the same answer she and President Barack Obama are now giving Arizona: They will not pay the bill.
The FBI will assist in the investigation of a suspicious envelope addressed to Gov. Jan Brewer that an employee at the Capitol opened Tuesday, sending the Executive Tower into one-hour lockdown after a white powder spilled from the envelope onto a computer.
Phoenix Fire Department hazardous materials experts spent less than one hour in the building. No injuries or complaints of illness were reported and the tower was reopened around 11:20 a.m.
The letter was opened in the governor's constituency services office in the tower at 1700 W. Washington St.
Most Americans aren't racists. They're law-abiding citizens who want live the American dream and raise their children in a safe, moral and productive environment. No country in the world allows illegal aliens to run around rampant without fear of retribution like the U.S. does. None. Born outside the U.S. and want to live the American dream? Do the right thing and get naturalized.Though the new immigration law she signed has led to criticism of Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) around the world, a new poll from Rasmussen taken since the bill was signed shows that many people in her state are nothing but appreciative.
Brewer's job approval rating stands at 56% in the poll, a huge bounce from the last Rasmussen poll taken two weeks ago. That poll showed Brewer with a 40% approval rating.
Previous polling shows Brewer's approval rating well below the new Rasmussen numbers. The TPM Poll Average (including the new Rasmussen poll) shows Brewer with an approval rating of 46.3% and a disapproval rating of 43.4.
Posts
All Comments
