nr
York. noncompliance with ederal immi- Sacramenw,
romento and Vi _
iVart Yee from New onstrate that it
f
Thomas Fuller +--
reported _
Suit Against California
Relies on a Court Case
Won by Obama in 2012
tr. sac
..Sre•pfzera shacleee, a law professes-et the Chzieersity of Tetras, said
history was repeating itself, but
backward.
"The suit is modeled on the
Marna administration's successful suit against Arizona," he said.
But he added that "some of the
key considerations are flipped."
In the Arizona case, conservatives insisted that respect for state
sovereignty required letting
states play a leading role in controlling immigration within their
borders. But Mr. Sessions, a longtime conservative himself, disavowed that position in his speech
on Wednesday. "Immigration law
is the province of the federal government," he said.
Justice Antonin Scalia, the conservative jurist who died in 2016,
took a different view of the Arizona case. In an impassioned partial dissent, he wrote that "it is
easy to lose sight of the states' traditional role in regulating immigration — and to overlook their
sovereign prerogative to do so."
There is no doubt that the California lawsuit is at odds with some
of the Trump administration's
usual positions. "It's a fascinating
suit on a number of levels," Professor Vladeck said, "not the least of
aznalosous contexts,
Cristina nearigoes, a law proat 'Yale said she detected
political parallels between the two
suits.
"Both administrations claim
that the state laws they challenge
impermissibly interfere with the
executive branch's ability to enforce the immigration laws," she
said. "But both lawsuits are also
clearly designed to take on visible
and politically powerful local officials whose vision of immigration
policy conflicts with the president's and his supporters'."
In a news conference on
Wednesday, Xavier Becerra, the
California attorney general, said
he was ready for the fight. The
state's laws, he said, were "fully
constitutional and provide for the
safety and welfare of all our people."
"California is in the business of
public safety," he said. "We are not
in the business of deportations?'
The Justice Department challenged parts of three of California's so-called sanctuary laws.
One restricts employers from cooperating with immigration officials. A second generally prohibits
state officials from telling federal
ones when undocumented immigrants are to be released from
NOAH BERGER/AGENGE FRANGE.PRESSE — GETTY IMAGES
Protesting a speech delivered by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in Sacramento on Wednesday.
The state may not
pursue policies that
undermine federal
law,' a justice wrote.
the commandeering issue was a
substantial one. "To the ?xtenttlie-,_
Trump administration s claims
against California would produce
an outcome that would effectively
force states and localities to participate m immigration enforcement; she said,'. there couldhe an
unconstitutional commandeering:"
Professor Spiro said that California may have the upper hand in
the suit's early stages, as the issues in it are novel, leaving judges
with substantial discretion.
The Trump administration has
not fared well in federal courts in
California in other cases concerning immigration, including ones
challenging President Trump's efforts to restrict travel from predominantly Muslim countries and
to rescind a program protecting
some 700,000 young unauthorized
immigrants from deportation.
But the ultimate fate of the suit
will probably rest with the Su-
preme Court. In 2012, with what
may have been unwarranted optimism Justice Kennedy said he
hoped that conflicts over immigration policy would be worked
out through reasoned discussion.
"The national government has
significant power to regulate immigration," he wrote. "The sound
exercise of national power over
immigration depends on the nation's meeting its responsibility to
base its laws on a political will informed by searching, thoughtful,
rational civic discourse?'
state custody. A third requires
state officials to inspect some facilities that house people detained
on behalf of the federal government.
Jennifer Chacon, a law professor at the University of California,
Irvine, said the state laws had
been carefully written to avoid direct conflicts with federal immigration laws. "I think it is clear
that California deliberately tried
to draft laws that involved core exercises of state police power in a
way that did not run afoul of federal law," she said.
Each state law presents different issues, and courts may give
varying answers depending on
how directly the state laws conflict with federal ones. More generally, though, courts will take account of the Supreme Court's decision in the Arizona case, which
called for collaboration rather
than conflict.
"Consultation between federal
and state officials is an important
feature of the immigration system?' Justice Kennedy wrote in
the court's decision in the Arizona
case.
Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat,
has said that consultation is fine
but that federal officials should
not use California's resources to
pursue undocumented Californians. The federal government, he
added, may do so on its own.
"They are free to use their own
considerable resources to enforce
federal immigration law in California," he said in October in signing one of the challenged laws.
The Supreme Court has said
that the federal government may
not commandeer state resources
to achieve federal objectives. In
his speech on Wednesday, Mr. Sessions denied that anything like
that was afoot.
"Contrary to what you might
hear from the lawless open borders radicals," he said, "we are not
asking California, Oakland or anyone else to enforce immigration
laws."
"We are simply asking California and other sanctuary jurisdictions to stop actively obstructing
federal law enforcement," he added.
But Professor Rodriguez said
Investigating Sexual Misconduct Accusations, Arizona State Suspends a Physicist
By KENNETH CHANG
Arizona State University has
suspended Lawrence M. Krauss,
a prominent theoretical physicist,
while the university investigates
accusations of sexual misconduct
over a decade.
"In an effort to avoid further
disruption to the normal course of
business as the university continues to gather facts about the allegations, Krauss has been placed
on paid leave and is prohibited
from being on campus for the duration of the review," the university said in a statement released
on Thesday.
Last month, BuzzFeed reported
that several women have accused
Dr. Krauss of inappropriate behavior including groping women
and making sexist jokes.
The university said it would not
Order home delivery today.
release any additional details until
its investigation is complete.
Dr. Krauss, a professor in the
university's School of Earth and
Space Exploration, is director of
Arizona State's Origins Project, a
multidisciplinary research effort
to tackle questions about life, the
universe and complex social problems. He gained prominence for
his book, "The Physics of Star
Trek" in 1995. He later became one
of the leaders of the so-called
"skeptics" movement that espouses science over religion. He
has also written essays and Op-Ed
articles that were published in
The Times.
Michael Crow, president of Arizona State, told The State Press,
an independent student news organization, that the university had
received no complaints of harassment against Dr. Krauss. The
university started the investigation after being contacted by Buz-
zFeed.
Dr. Krauss moved to Arizona
State from Case Western Reserve
University in Ohio in 2008.
Lawrence M. Krauss is director of Arizona State's Origins
Project, a multidisciplinary research effort to tackle questions about life, the universe
and complex social problems.
CAROLYN RAs thA/AA.A,AT`rs YY`''S
On Wednesday afternoon, Dr.
Krauss posted a lengthy rebuttal
to the BuzzFeed article. He said
many of the incidents reported by
BuzzFeed were based on unsub-
F'c05
so. els
ce
4
t11_,
-,sto•-•
[tate
;ad
g.241
r.2,0
fM1
leAV
11v.
signed from the board of e
stantiated rumors and others letin of the Atomic Scientists,
which is best known for its
Doomsday Clock that represents
that danger of atomic war and
other calamities to the planet. In
his resignation letter, he said he
was resigning from the board because he did not want to distract
from the organization's work.
Additionally, a conference
scheduled for next month to mark
the 10th anniversary of the On-
of often vague innuendo. gins Project has been canceled.
The university is not the only "What we hope to do is reschedule
one to take action against Dr. it for another time," Dr. Krauss
Krauss. The American Physical said in an interview on Wednes-
Society and other organizations day.
were distorted and misleading.
"Has my language or demeanor
sometimes made others feel uncomfortable?" Dr. Krauss wrote.
"Clearly yes, and for that I sincerely apologize. Nevertheless,
the BuzzFeed article effectively
paints a false picture of me and my
relationships with others through
a mosaic constructed largely out
of anonymous hearsay aml a we b
have withdrawn invitations to Dr.
Krauss for upcoming talks. The
Center for Inquiry, an organization that promotes secularism,
suspended its association with Dr.
Krauss on Monday.
On Tuesday, Dr. Krauss reth Bul-