The May 26 oral arguments for the Arizona SB 1070 case before the U.S. Supreme Court were notable for the use of the correct immigration law terminology for aliens unlawfully present in the United States. 

Justice Alito and Roberts both used the term "illegal alien" once.  Justice Sotomayor used the same "illegal alien" term eight times in questioning Solicitor General Verrilli.  Justice Scalia used the term "illegal immigrant" once.

Attorneys representing two Frederick County Maryland sheriff's deputies in an important legal battle, upholding the right of local police to detain aliens without official immigration papers and apprehend aliens wanted by ICE for immigration law violations, have filed a brief explaining for the third time why federal District Judge Benson Legg should reaffirm his March 2012 order dismissing all charges against the Sheriff's Office and its dedicated officers.  Access the complete brief below.

On March 16, 2012, IRLI attorney Garrett Roe filed a friend of the court brief with the Federal Appeals Court in Atlanta, supporting Alabama’s Commissioner of Revenue Julie Magee in a lawsuit filed by attorneys representing MALDEF and the SPLC.  The case is Alabama Fair Housing Center v. Magee.  That case was originally filed in the Middle District of Alabama, and challenges the Commissioner’s practice of requiring proof of lawful presence to obtain a registration decal for motor homes in the State under HB 56, Section 30.  Section 30 prohibits Alabama from entering into business transactions with the State.  Access the full brief below.

On February 13, 2012, two amicus briefs, one by IRLI and another by IRLI-affiliated outside attorney Kris Kobach, were filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the U.S. v. Arizona (SB 1070) litigation.  The combined briefs present nineteen essential legal points which explain how the three challenged provisions of SB1070 are in full harmony with the federal immigration laws enacted by Congress. The briefs also explain the provisions of the U.S. Constitution which delineate the complementary roles of Congress, the executive branch, and the states in the enforcement of American immigration and nationality law.

 IRLI has filed an amicus brief (attached below) with the federal district court in Salt Lake City. The IRLI brief highlights a critical point of law that none of the Attorneys General in any of the states being sued by the Obama administration has yet addressed:  The claim by both DHS and the La Raza plaintiffs that agency “priorities” preempt state cooperative enforcement laws like HB 497.  IRLI investigated the source of this alleged “priority” power grab and has concluded that it is illegitimate, as it is almost entirely based on internal DHS memoranda, in particular the controversial “Morton memoranda” by current ICE Director John Morton.