Judge to rule later whether immigration law should go into effect July 1

By Jeremy Redmon

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

A federal judge on Mondayasked tough questions about the potential fallout from Georgia’s new anti-illegal immigration law but said he would rule later on whether it should be halted.

Many of the legal arguments for and against the Arizona-style law revolve around whether it is constitutional. But during a hearing Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Thrash repeatedly focused on the law’s practicality. He questioned its purpose, suggested it would not be enforced consistently across state’s 159 counties and said local authorities could pick and choose who to target with it, favoring some people and not others.

Thrash, who was nominated to the court by President Bill Clinton, offered one hypothetical example in which local authorities could target immigrants to get them out of their public schools but not touch the immigrant cook who works at the popular Mexican restaurant in town. The judge also questioned whether teenage U.S. citizens should be prosecuted for driving their illegal immigrant parents to the grocery store.

Based on Thrash’s line of questioning, the Republican author of the law said Monday he wouldn’t be surprised if the judge grants opponents of the law a preliminary injunction and halts the measure. But Rep. Matt Ramsey,R-Peachtree City, said he was confident the state would appeal to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta and win.

Read more: http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/judge-to-rule-later-982101.html