Ariz. Immigration Law Foes Launch Protest Marches

(July 29) -- The first day of Arizona's new and mostly defanged immigration law brought hundreds of protesters into the streets of Phoenix today even as they savored their recent legal victory in a federal court.

Although U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton on Wednesday threw out some of the more controversial parts of SB 1070, temporarily blunting the new law's impact, hundreds of demonstrators gathered at dawn to protest. They marched from the state Capitol and held a prayer vigil before moving on to the federal courthouse, where police in riot gear waited.

A few hours later, demonstrators blocked downtown streets as they chanted, "Hey ho, hey ho, SB 1070 has got to go." They also converged on the office of controversial Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, yelling, "Sheriff Joe, we are here, we will not live in fear."

Three people were arrested at the courthouse. At least eight protesters who approached a police line were taken into custody, as were two dozen others who sat down in the middle of a street and blocked traffic.

In Tucson, traffic on I-19 was briefly snarled after protesters threw tires, paint buckets and glass onto the roadway. One person was arrested.

Rep. Raul Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat and outspoken opponent of the law, closed his Yuma office after staff discovered a window shattered by a bullet.

But in Santa Cruz County along the border with Mexico, Sheriff Tony Estrada said Thursday was just another day. "Business as usual. No problems. It would have been different if I had to be enforcing that 1070," said Estrada, an opponent of the law whose county is 80 percent Hispanic and where federal border patrol agents deal with most immigration issues. He said his 40-officer force spread over 1,240 square miles "would have our hands full if we were enforcing that and questioning and checking up on people's immigration status. It would be too labor-intensive. We're not equipped to deal with it."

Immigrant advocates demonstrated their solidarity in protests elsewhere. In New York City, about 300 people gathered at the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan. About 200 protesters marched at a busy intersection in downtown Los Angeles.

While opponents marched, supporters of the statute worked to reverse Bolton's ruling, which blocks the requirement that law enforcement officers check the immigration status of people stopped for other offenses and the requirement that immigrants carry identification papers at all times.

Lawyers for Gov. Jan Brewer, who vowed that "this fight is far from over," filed an expedited appeal at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to reinstate the provisions blocked by Bolton. The case could eventually make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Arpaio, who helped deport more than 26,000 immigrants since 2007 without the benefit of the new law, conducted his business as usual. As promised, he launched his 17th "crime suppression operation" aimed at undocumented residents.

"My deputies will arrest them and put them in pink underwear," Arpaio said, a reference to one of his trademark punishments for prisoners.

Antonio Gonzalez, president of the William C. Velasquez Institute, a think tank on Latino issues, told AOL News that a "chilling and repressive atmosphere" remains in Maricopa County despite the judge's decision because of Arpaio, "who has made a career of racial profiling."

"Arizona continues to be in a state of siege," he said. "Cooperation with police forces is at an all-time low. Any officer will tell you the No. 1 tool to solving crime is cooperation from the public, but the atmosphere is so polarized and people are so sacred and confused about the role of the police that they don't report crime."

Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villaseñor said in an interview that the law as enacted "didn't really change much of what we have been doing" because most of the new provisions were put on hold by the judge. He said about 150 opponents of the law and 40 supporters took to the streets, "numbers greatly diminished from what we expected" before the judge filleted the law.

An outspoken opponent of the legislation, he still believes immigration is the job of the federal government and worries how his force, which has shrunk by more than 10 percent because of budget-induced layoffs, will fare as the city faces a huge deficit next year.

"This is not the time to take on additional responsibilities," Villaseñor said. "The law was so poorly worded ... that it set up unenforceable situations that was going to cause problems within our community toward legal immigrants with appropriate documentation."

Meanwhile, the Rev. Miguel Rivera, chairman of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders, told AOL News that ministers in his group will continue to provide sanctuary for U.S.-born and undocumented children of deported immigrants as well as transportation and other services to those without papers.

"We will definitely will not comply" with the law, he said. "The church has a moral and biblical and doctrinal responsibility to take care of those seeking our support."

But Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform said the law still has some teeth. He noted that Bolton refused to block other parts of the law, most notably a provision that bars so-called "sanctuary cities," jurisdictions that limit enforcement of federal immigration laws.

He also noted that while police are not required to check the status of those they detain, they still can use their discretion if they have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person is here illegally.

"It's still too early to know what all the repercussions are," he said of the ruling, "but it takes away the set procedure police would follow and puts it back in the area of discretion as exercised by individual officers and departments."