AZ's immigration law doesn't violate the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause
- 2010/04/27 21:49:26
- Read all 74 opinions
14th Amendment Equal Protection Analysis:
1) Is the law facially discriminatory? No.
2)(a) Does the law have discriminatory effect? Considering, 99% of illegals are Latino, this argument could be made, so yes.
2)(b) Does the law have discriminatory purpose? No. Nothing in the legislative record or history indicates that the law was passed to target Latinos. It was passed to target violators of immigration law.
Because the law is neither facially discriminatory nor is it facially neutral but discriminatory in purpose, it is subject to rational basis test.
Does the government have a legitimate purpose to enact the law that is rationally related to the purpose? Yes, because AZ wants to keep its citizens safe, so it passed a law to arrest and deport those violating immigration law.
- DoJ stalling on protecting voting rights of military?
- Government has unlimited powers and is not constrained by the Constitution--Pete ...
- Poison Pill: The New Senate Energy Bill by BRIAN SUSSMAN
- New York Times blast's Government Motors' Chevy Volt
- The Amnesty Memo
- View more slideshows »
Government shutdown or not, there's a new $100 bill in town -- and apparently, people love it!
If Congress doesn't agree on how the U.S. will pay its bills by October 1st, the federal government will shut down. But how concerned is the average American? Not very.
Ever since President Obama's re-election back in November, the media hasn't stopped reporting about the ruffled course of the Republican party. So who's the future face of the GOP? Find out how the public voted.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has been at the center of media coverage for a while now. But more recently, the buzz has been about his proclaimed political party -- and whether or not he should change it.