Parts of Indiana’s Immigration Law Struck down by Federal Judge
Author: US Immigration Attorney Alena Shautsova
The Indiana immigration bill allowed authorities to arrest non-citizens without the use of warrants and prevented immigrants from using consular ID cards as a means of identification. However, according to a Reuter's article, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) brought a class-action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of this aspect of the Indiana immigration law. As a result of the lawsuit, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana ruled that not requiring warrants for arrests was a Fourth Amendment violation. The State of Indiana decided not to appeal the court's decision on this aspect of the bill, based on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in 2012 on the Arizona immigration law and the similarity it bore to Indiana's law. The end result of the court’s ruling is that the injunction against this aspect of the bill became permanent.
Not requiring warrants had created adverse effects. For one, despite the fact that immigrants were in the midst of working out their status, they were subject to arrest. This was also inconsistent with U.S. immigration law, which allows immigrants subject to the removal process to remain legally in the United States while the legal action is ongoing. Arresting them without warrants and the arrests for using consular IDs basically challenged the federal government’s right to deal with immigration matters.
Whenever you have questions about immigration, encounter legal issues regarding your immigration status, or face the threat of deportation, at your first opportunity consult a immigration lawyer. The attorney can provide you with effective legal advice that protects your rights and also defend you in legal actions.