Summary of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)
Amicus Curiae Brief in Supreme Court Case Arizona v. USA
In an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed with the Supreme Court March 26, 2012,
the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) supports the United States
government and urges the Supreme Court to stop four harmful provisions of Arizona state
immigration law S.B. 1070 from taking effect. USCCB, whose members are active Catholic
Bishops in the United States, argues that S.B. 1070, by violating the federal government’s
authority to regulate immigration, impinges upon the family unity, human dignity, and religious
liberty, objectives enshrined in immigration law and the Constitution. The Conference contends
that the Arizona law conflicts with the well-established goals of federal immigration law to
promote family unity and human dignity and that the law – and similar State laws – threaten the
Church’s religious practice of providing pastoral and social services in accordance with Church
teachings.
Summary of the Arguments
1. Federal Law Preempts Arizona Law S.B. 1070
The Conference supports the argument of the United States government that sections of S.B.
1070 violate the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution and are preempted by federal law.
The Conference argues that because Arizona law S.B. 1070 stands as an obstacle to the full
purposes of federal immigration law as established through federal statutes, the state law is
superseded by federal law. These purposes include the preservation of family unity and respect
for human dignity.
2. S.B. 1070 Impedes Federal Goals of Promoting Family Unity and Human Dignity
The Conference argues that sections of S.B. 1070 at issue in this case would hinder the critical
federal objectives of promoting family unity and human dignity by replacing them with the
single goal of reducing the number of undocumented immigrants in Arizona at all costs. Federal
immigration law seeks to balance the removal of undocumented immigrants from this country
against competing objectives including concerns of family unity and human dignity. The
Conference argues that the Arizona law’s singular state goal of “attrition” of undocumented
immigrants through enforcement is flatly inconsistent with the longstanding U.S. approach to
immigration policy to protect family unity and human dignity. The federal government is in the
best position to balance the competing objectives of enforcement with family unity and human
dignity.
3. S.B. 1070 and Similar State Laws Threaten Religious Liberty
The Catholic Church, like other religious institutions, believes that it has a moral duty to help all
in need. The Conference argues that S.B. 1070 and related state immigration laws have
provisions that could either criminalize its duty of charity or require the institutions that provide
charity to engage in costly, if not impossible, monitoring of individuals they serve. The state
laws would then require institutions to exclude from charity all those who presence Arizona and
other states would criminalize. The Conference argues that the proliferation of fifty different
laws similar to S.B. 1070 would unnecessarily intrude on the Church’s religious practice, thus
violating its religious liberty.
Prepared by the Office of Migration Policy and Public Affairs, U.S. Conference of Catholic
Bishops