9th Circuit Court of Appeals strikes down Prop. 100 (2006) denying bond to undocumented immigrants


Arizona is really bad at enacting constitutional laws. It could have something to do with the fact that the persons who propose these laws follow a constitution that only exists in their fevered minds, as opposed to the actual Constitution, with which they disagree. They believe in an “aspirational” constitution as they imagine it to be.

Earlier this year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the ‘Kochtopus Anti-ObamaCare Prop. 106. This was the so-called “Health Care Freedom Act,” aka the Arizona Health Insurance Reform Amendment, Proposition 106, promoted by “Kochtopus” front man Dr. Eric Novak.

gavelToday the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc struck down another Arizona law, Proposition 100 (2006), which amended the Arizona Constitution to deny bond to undocumented immigrants charged with “serious” crimes. The case is Angel Lopez-Valenzuela v. Joe Arpaio, (No. 11-16487). You can read the Opinion Here (.pdf).

The en banc Court reversed a three judge panel of the Ninth Circuit upholding the district court’s grant of summary judgment. Prop. 100 “violates the substantive component of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.”

The Arizona Republic reports, Another Ariz. immigration law shot down:

Another of Arizona’s immigration laws was struck down today when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unconstitutional a law denying bond to undocumented immigrants charged with “serious” crimes.

The law, known as Proposition 100, was passed in November 2006, during the height of anti-immigrant sentiment in the state Legislature.

After its passage, the Legislature defined “serious” crimes as Class 4 felonies or worse — the most serious felonies are Class 1, the least serious Class 6. And then subsequent immigration laws tended to be classified as Class 4.

The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the law in federal court, but it was upheld by a U.S. District Court judge in Phoenix, and the first appeal in the 9th Circuit failed last June.

The ACLU then asked for the case to be reheard en banc.

“Today’s ruling vindicates one of our basic American freedoms—the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee that every person accused of a crime is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty,” said Cecillia Wang, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, who argued the case before the 9th Circuit.

“The court has restored to Arizona the fundamental constitutional principle that each person is entitled to an individual hearing in court before they are locked up while awaiting trial.”

Taxpayers have wasted more money enacting and defending unconstitutional laws because of their nativist and racist fixation of hating on people for breathing while brown. How much more in tax dollars are you willing to piss away?