Judge allows key immigration provisions to go into effect 
 
 A federal judge in Birmingham ruled Wednesday that key provisions of the Alabama's immigration law can go into effect, finding that the U.S. Justice Depart­ment did not meet requirements for an 
 
 A link to this page will be included in your message. ||||| A federal judge on Wednesday upheld most of the sections of Alabama’s far-reaching immigration law that had been challenged by the Obama administration, including portions that had been blocked in other states. 
 
 The decision, by Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn of Federal District Court in Birmingham, makes it much more likely that the fate of the recent flurry of state laws against illegal immigration will eventually be decided by the Supreme Court. It also means that Alabama now has by far the strictest such law of any state. 
 
 “Today Judge Blackburn upheld the majority of our law,” Gov. Robert Bentley said in a brief statement he delivered outside the State Capitol in Montgomery. “With those parts that were upheld, we have the strongest immigration law in the country.” 
 
 The judge did issue a preliminary injunction against several sections of the law, agreeing with the government’s case that they pre-empted federal law. She blocked a broad provision that outlawed the harboring or transporting of illegal immigrants and another that barred illegal immigrants from enrolling in or attending public universities. 
 
 The governor, in his statement, said he believed even the sections that were temporarily enjoined on Wednesday would eventually be upheld, and added that the state would consider appealing if that did not happen. 
 
 For the most part, Judge Blackburn, who was appointed by the elder President George Bush, disagreed with the Justice Department’s arguments, including those that had been successful in challenges to laws in Arizona and Georgia. 
 
 The judge upheld a section that requires state and local law enforcement officials to try to verify a person’s immigration status during routine traffic stops or arrests, if “a reasonable suspicion” exists that the person is in the country illegally. And she ruled that a section that criminalized the “willful failure” of a person in the country illegally to carry federal immigration papers did not pre-empt federal law. 
 
 In both cases, she rejected the reasoning of district and appeals courts that had blocked similar portions of Arizona’s law. Legal experts expected the Justice Department to appeal. 
 
 “The department is reviewing the decision to determine next steps,” Xochitl Hinojosa, a department spokeswoman, said in a statement. “We will continue to evaluate state immigration-related laws and will not hesitate to bring suit if, in fact, a state creates its own immigration policy or enforces state laws in a manner that interferes with federal immigration law.” 
 
 The Alabama law was the latest, and broadest, of the state laws against illegal immigration, going further than one passed in Arizona. 
 
 While Alabama is estimated to have a relatively small population of people who are in the country illegally, the numbers have been growing. 
 
 Acting on a pledge that they would crack down on illegal immigration, Republicans passed the bill when they won a supermajority in the State Legislature in the 2010 elections. Mr. Bentley signed it into law in June. 
 
 Del Marsh, the Republican president pro tem of the Alabama Senate, said in a statement after Wednesday’s ruling, “Our goal has always been to make sure Alabama jobs and taxpayer-funded resources are going to legal Alabama residents, and Judge Blackburn’s ruling is a significant win for this cause.” 
 
 All summer, rallies for and against the law have been taking place throughout the state. Farmers and even the state agriculture commissioner have raised concerns about the law’s effect on farms, sheriffs have condemned it as too onerous for financially hurting counties and others have worried that it could seriously hinder the state’s efforts to rebuild after last April’s devastating tornadoes. 
 
 The law’s backers argued that most of the concerns arose out of a misreading of the law that they believed in some cases was intentional. 
 
 The judge ruled on three suits challenging the law on Wednesday, one brought by the federal government, another by a group of church leaders and another brought by civil rights groups. 
 
 She dismissed the suit brought by church leaders, who had argued that the law prevented them from carrying out crucial duties of their ministry, concluding that they did not have standing to challenge one part of the law and that she had addressed the other challenge in her ruling on the federal law. 
 
 Judge Blackburn agreed with the arguments of the civil rights groups on several sections or subsections of the law, but did not address many of their arguments because they overlapped with those put forth in the Justice Department’s suit. 
 
 “We’re really disappointed,” said Andre Segura of the American Civil Liberties Union, a plaintiff in one of the suits. “We already know that this is going to cause a lot of problems in Alabama.” 
 
 The civil rights groups are planning an appeal. 
 
 Among the other sections Judge Blackburn upheld: one that nullifies any contracts entered into by an illegal immigrant; another that forbids any transaction between an illegal immigrant and any division of the state, a proscription that has already led to the denial of a Montgomery man’s application for water and sewage service; and, most controversially, a section that requires elementary and secondary schools to determine the immigration status of incoming students. 
 
 The civil rights groups challenged this last section on the ground that it would unlawfully deter students from enrolling in school, even if it did not explicitly allow schools to turn students away. The judge dismissed their challenge for lack of standing, though she did not rule on the argument’s merits. 
 
 Peter J. Spiro, a law professor at Temple University, said: “This decision really gives the anti-immigration folks more of a victory than they’ve been getting in other courts. There’s a lot for them to be happy about.” 
 
 Still, Professor Spiro added, “This is not the last word on the constitutionality of this statute.” ||||| Police in Alabama are getting ready to enforce what is considered by many as the toughest immigration law in the United States. 
 
 Ashley Hendricks, a University of Alabama student from Huntsville, holds a sign and chants while protesting HB-56 on Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2011. Approximately 40 students gathered for a protest of the... (Associated Press) 
 
 Becky Robinson a University of Alabama sophomore from Huntsville, holds a sign and chants while protesting HB-56 on Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2011. Approximately 40 students gathered for a protest of the immigration... (Associated Press) 
 
 Gov. Robert Bentley talks with reporters outside the Capitol in Montgomery, Ala., Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2011. Bentley said a federal judge left most of the state's tough new immigration law in place,... (Associated Press) 
 
 Gov. Robert Bentley arrives for a news conference outside the Alabama Capitol in Montgomery, Ala., Wednesday, Sept. 28, 2011. Bentley said a federal judge left most of the state's tough new immigration... (Associated Press) 
 
 Beginning Thursday, authorities can question people suspected of being in the country illegally and hold them without bond, and officials can check the immigration status of students in public schools, Gov. Robert Bentley said. 
 
 Those two key aspects of Alabama's new law were upheld by a federal judge on Wednesday. 
 
 The governor said parts of the law take effect immediately. 
 
 "We intend to enforce it," Bentley said. 
 
 U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn, a Republican appointee, wrote in a 115-page opinion that some parts of the Republican-backed law conflict with federal statutes, but others don't. Left standing were several key elements that help make the Alabama law stricter than similar laws passed in Arizona, Utah, Indiana and Georgia. Other federal judges have blocked all or parts of those. 
 
 There are three separate lawsuits against the Alabama law, including a challenge from President Barack Obama's administration. Blackburn's ruling is expected to be appealed. 
 
 John Carroll, a former U.S. magistrate judge who is now dean of Samford University's law school in suburban Birmingham, said Blackburn's ruling was mostly consistent with decisions from other states with the exception of her allowing Alabama's "stop and ask" provision, which lets police request people's immigration papers. 
 
 "I think down the line there are other arguments that can be made as the case goes forward," said Carroll. 
 
 Agricultural leaders fear the law could cost farmers money this autumn by scaring away Hispanic workers who are vital to harvesting crops statewide. 
 
 "There are some sweet potato farmers in this state it's really going to hurt. I don't know how they're going to get their crops out," said Jeremy Calvert, a farmer in rural Bremen. 
 
 Zan Green, a tea party activist in metro Birmingham, said she was happy with the decision, saying citizens of foreign countries have benefited for years through welfare, entitlements, education, medical care and child tax credits. 
 
 "Judge Blackburn's ruling is the beginning of removing the enormous financial burden of illegal immigration from the backs of Alabama citizens," she said in a statement. 
 
 The judge refused to block a section of the law that requires public schools to verify students' citizenship and report overall statistics to the state, but the immediate effect isn't clear since schools have already started. Alabama was the first state to include such a provision, so Blackburn's decision could set a blueprint should others adopt similar laws. 
 
 Immigration became a hot issue in Alabama over the past decade as the state's Hispanic population grew by 145 percent to about 185,600. While the group still represents only about 4 percent of the population, some counties in north Alabama have large Spanish-speaking communities and schools where most of the students are Hispanic. 
 
 Alabama Republicans have long sought to clamp down on illegal immigration and passed the law earlier this year after gaining control of the Legislature for the first time since Reconstruction. Bentley signed it, saying it was vital to protect jobs of legal residents. 
 
 Republican Sen. Scott Beason, one of the sponsors of the bill, was happy with Blackburn's decision and hopes, like the governor, that the entire law takes effect after appeals. 
 
 "There are still legal questions and there's still work to be done," he said. 
 
 Blackburn's orders temporarily blocked several parts of the law until she can issue a final ruling. Those measures would: 
 
 _ Make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to solicit work. 
 
 _ Make it a crime to transport or harbor an illegal immigrant. 
 
 _ Allow discrimination lawsuits against companies that dismiss legal workers while hiring illegal immigrants. 
 
 _ Forbid businesses from taking tax deductions for wages paid to workers who are in the country illegally. 
 
 _ Bar illegal immigrants from attending public colleges. 
 
 _ Bar drivers from stopping along a road to hire temporary workers. 
 
 _ Make federal verification the only way in court to determine if someone is here legally. 
 
 ___ 
 
 Associated Press writer Phillip Rawls contributed to this report from Montgomery.
– Starting today, Alabama police will enforce what many are calling the US’ toughest immigration law. A federal judge upheld key aspects of the law yesterday, including allowing authorities to question and detain suspected illegal immigrants and requiring officials to check public school students’ immigration status. The governor says those portions of the law, which was passed earlier this year, will be enforced immediately. Despite the fact that other parts of the law are still on hold, it is already stricter than similar laws in Arizona, Utah, Indiana, and Georgia. Three lawsuits, including one from President Obama’s administration, have been filed against the law, and the judge’s ruling will likely be appealed. Other parts of the law that are going into effect include making it a crime to not carry proper alien documentation, forbidding contracts with illegal immigrants, and forbidding state and local agencies from doing business with undocumented immigrants. The AP and the Montgomery Advertiser have details on the portions of the law that are still blocked while waiting for a final ruling. The New York Times notes that the judge’s ruling means it’s very likely that the fate of all such state immigration laws will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court.