Constitutional Accountability Center Constitutional Accountability Center

Constitutional Accountability Center Statement On Federal Appellate Court Hearing In Historic Arizona Immigration Law Case

For Immediate Release: November 1, 2010

Contact: Doug Pennington, Press Secretary
(202) 296-6889 x303
pennington@theusconstitution.org

Constitutional Accountability Center Statement On 
Federal Appellate Court Hearing In Historic Arizona Immigration Law Case

CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra: “Governor Jan Brewer, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and other Arizona politicians aren’t fighting with the federal government. They are really fighting with our Nation’s Founders.”

Washington, DC – After the historic legal arguments over Arizona’s controversial immigration law, SB 1070, held today before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Constitutional Accountability Center released the following statement:

“The court appeared convinced that significant parts of the Arizona immigration law are unconstitutional,” said CAC President Doug Kendall. “As CAC made clear in our brief, the text of the Constitution demands uniform federal rules on immigration and naturalization. Provisions of the Arizona statute, such as the part that makes it a state crime to be present in the United States illegally, are flatly inconsistent with that uniformity.”

CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra said, “Governor Jan Brewer, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, and other Arizona politicians aren’t fighting with the federal government. They are really fighting with our Nation’s Founders, including James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, who made it clear in the Constitution that the federal government has exclusive power to make America’s immigration laws.”

Read the brief CAC filed in Arizona v. United States here: http://theusconstitution.org/cases/briefs/us-v-arizona/9th-circuit-amicus-brief-us-v-az

##

Constitutional Accountability Center (www.theusconstitution.org) is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history. CAC also “live blogged” the Court hearing today for Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-kendall/united-states-v-arizona-a_b_7….

###

More from

Rule of Law
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Comey v. Department of Justice

In Comey v. Department of Justice, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the Attorney General can fire an Assistant U.S. Attorney in contravention of legal protections...
Civil and Human Rights
July 18, 2026

Arnie Arnesen Attitude July 16 2026

Attitude with Arnie Arnesen
CAC’s David H. Gans joined The Attitude with Arnie Arnesen to discuss the Reconstruction Amendments. Listen...
Access to Justice
----- Supreme Court -----

Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia

In Crowther v. Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, the Supreme Court is considering whether employees of federally funded educational institutions can bring Title IX suits for sex discrimination.
Civil and Human Rights
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Wridt v. City of New York

In Wridt v. City of New York, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is considering whether the NYPD’s mass surveillance system is unconstitutional.
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 16, 2026

CAC Release: Todd Blanche’s Record Disqualifies Him From Serving as America’s Lawyer

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to this week’s confirmation hearings on Todd Blanche’s nomination to...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Rule of Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security

In DHS Probationary Employees 1 Class v. Department of Homeland Security, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering whether the Trump Administration’s efforts to unilaterally reshape the federal government through...