ARTICLE
30 June 2011

Federal Judge Blocks Certain Provisions Of Georgia Immigration Law

FP
Fisher Phillips LLP

Contributor

Fisher Phillips LLP logo
Fisher Phillips LLP is a national law firm committed to providing practical business solutions for employers’ workplace legal problems. Labor and employment law is all the firm does, offering deep and broad knowledge and experience in the area of the law the attorneys know best. Fisher Phillips attorneys help clients avoid legal problems, are dedicated to providing exceptional client service, and are there when you need them. The firm has over 400 attorneys in 34 offices with 33 locations. Learn more at www.fisherphillips.com.
Today, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash granted a temporary injunction on key parts of the Georgia Immigration law due to go into effect on July 1, 2011.
United States Immigration

Today, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash granted a temporary injunction on key parts of the Georgia Immigration law due to go into effect on July 1, 2011. The Judge ruled that the criminal provisions of the law, specifically those empowering police to investigate the immigration status of certain suspects and those prohibiting the transport, harboring, and enticing of illegal aliens, ran afoul of federal law. The parts of the law that were not blocked will go into effect as scheduled, including those requiring state contractors and private employers to participate in E-Verify. You can read our original Legal Alert about the Georgia Law.

The temporary injunction will continue until the Judge makes a determination on the merits of the lawsuit filed by several parties, including the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, against the Georgia immigration law. State officials have indicated they would appeal the ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.

Judges in Indiana, Utah and Arizona have granted preliminary injunctions on significant components of those states' immigration laws. Tough immigration laws recently passed by Alabama and South Carolina are likely to face similar legal challenges.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More