By Nick Worth “Today, Arizona is one big step closer to implementing the core provision of SB 1070,” Arizona Governor Jan Brewer said in a written statement. Brewer’s comment was made in response to the Sept. 5 decision of U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton to deny a request for another injunction against Section 2B of Senate Bill 1070, Arizona’s controversial immigration law. The section drew fire from immigrant advocacy groups because it requires law enforcement officers to check the citizenship and immigration status of persons stopped, detained or arrested during any lawful stop if there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is in the country illegally. Navajo County Sheriff KC Clark said implementation of the law would only have the effect of requiring his officers to do what they were already doing voluntarily. “Our officers were already asking for proof of citizenship if probable cause existed,” said Clark. “One of the questions on our county jail booking form asks about citizenship. “It’s been that way since before I got here,” he said. Opponents of the law included the American Civil Liberties Union, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and the National Immigration Law Center. The coalition had obtained an injunction from Bolton in 2010 when SB 1070 was first passed. The U.S. Department of Justice also filed lawsuits against Arizona over SB 1070. In her statement, Brewer applauded Bolton’s decision and said the law would give Arizona thousands of additional officers to collaborate with the federal government to enforce the law. Bolton issued her decision based on a decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court overruled her 2010 injunc-tion last June. In their decision, the Supreme Court Justices said Section 2B could not be held to be unconstitu-tional without first being put into effect and seeing if, in practice, it violates the civil rights of those required to prove their citizenship. Bolton also issued an order to the U.S. Department of Justice and the State of Arizona that they have 10 days in which to determine the language of the order that will lift the prior injunction. Hispanic leaders expressed fear that the implementation of the law would lead to racial profiling, and the organizations in the coalition that originally opposed the law promised to take it back to court if violations of the U.S. Constitution were found to have occurred. “We have strong policies against racial discrimination and racial profiling,” Clark said. He said Navajo County was the first county in the state to fully implement LEXIPOL, a system that writes procedural policies for law enforcement departments, based on the latest court and Supreme Court decisions. For example, Clark said a policy on the use of Tasers was available within 24 hours of the Supreme Court decision on the weapons when they were first introduced. Every day each deputy is required to answer a test on a policy question. In her statement, Brewer said, “After more than two years of legal challenges, it is time that Section 2B of SB 1070 takes effect. Given today’s ruling, along with the federal court’s suggestion that it intends in the very near future to formally lift the existing injunction, it is clear the day of implementation is fast approaching. “As I have said consistently, it is not enough that this law be enforced,” Brewer said. “It must be enforced efficiently, effectively and in harmony with the Constitution and civil rights. I have no doubt Arizona’s law enforcement officers are up for the task ahead.” “With us it’s going to be business as usual,” said Clark.