Justice Anthony Kennedy was the deciding vote in throwing out A) a requirement that police try to
determine the immigration status of people they stop under suspicion of even minor crimes; B) a law that made it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek employment; and C) a law that let police arrest a person without a warrant if they believed the person may have committed a crime that could lead to deportation.
An ICE agent on site would interview the defendant in a trailer shortly after intake to
determine his immigration status.
Requiring police officers to
determine the immigration status of people they stop for a violation of any law if the officers think the persons are in the country illegally
Not exact matches
As Washington wrestles with what to do about DACA, Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced today that he has signed an executive order prohibiting state agencies and officers from inquiring about or disclosing an individual's
immigration status unless required by law or necessary to
determine eligibility for a benefit or service.
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today (Friday) issued Executive Order 170 that prohibits state agencies and officers from inquiring about or disclosing an individual's
immigration status unless required by law or necessary to
determine eligibility for a benefit or service.
Now, educators and policymakers in that state are scrambling to
determine whether and how to enforce the new law, a direct challenge to Plyler v. Doe, a 1982 Supreme Court ruling that asserts that public schools must provide all students an education, regardless of their
immigration status.
A story in the June 16, 2010, issue of Education Week about the Arizona law SB 1070 mischaracterized the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe as barring schools from
determining students»
immigration status because of a potential «chilling» effect on their right to an education.
As a result of the Plyler ruling, public schools may not deny admission to a student on the basis of undocumented
status, treat a student differently to
determine residency, or require students or parents to disclose or document their
immigration status.
And they ask that the person be held so that they can actually
determine what the person's
immigration status is and what other legal issues that may arise in the context of the person's
immigration status.
The Court's reasoning in Rodriguez was that a when an individual does not have
immigration status and is subject to deportation, the jury should consider this factor of potential deportation in
determining how much money the injured party could make in the future.