By: Michael W. Savage

Attention is focused on Arizona and the federal government’s challenge to the state’s strict new immigration law, but three other states could adopt similar legislation next year.

Lawmakers in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah, which have already taken steps against illegal immigration, say that Arizona-style measures have a realistic chance of passing when their legislatures reconvene in 2011.

The Obama administration sued Arizona in federal court Tuesday, charging that the state law usurps federal authority, would hamper immigration enforcement and would lead to police harassment of those who have no proof of lawful status. The government asked that a federal judge stop the law from taking effect July 29.

Legislators in at least 17 other states introduced bills this year similar to the Arizona law, which allows officers to question anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally. But most of those measures are not considered likely to be adopted or signed by governors.

The political climate in Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah, however, improves the chances that state legislatures there could follow Arizona’s lead in 2011.

In 2007, Oklahoma led the way on such laws by adopting legislation that makes it a felony to knowingly transport or shelter an illegal immigrant. It also blocked illegal immigrants from obtaining driver’s licenses and in-state tuition.

State Rep. Randy Terrill (R), who sponsored the measure, has expressed a desire to go beyond the Arizona law when he introduces a bill next year that would seize property from businesses that knowingly employ illegal immigrants.

Terrill cited the arrest last week of an alleged Mexican drug cartel member in Oklahoma as evidence that an “Arizona-plus” measure is needed urgently. He said the effect of Arizona’s law has been to push illegal immigrants “straight down Interstate 40″ toward Oklahoma.

Vivek Malhotra, advocacy and policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said the administration’s decision to sue Arizona could discourage other states from doing the same. But he also said that similar legislation may be adopted in 2011.

“After the other border states, it is natural to look at the states that have enacted the most anti-immigrant laws” before Arizona, Malhotra said. He said he expected Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah to make the “most vigorous effort” to enact similar legislation early next year.

Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said he thinks the Obama administration designed the lawsuit against Arizona as a “shot across the bows” of all states considering similar moves. He said he doubts, though, that Terrill will be deterred.

“Randy Terrill has made this his issue in Oklahoma and has earned bipartisan support in the past,” he said. “He is a determined guy and he is not going to back down too easily.”

In Utah, state Rep. Stephen Sandstrom (R) has been making regular fact-finding trips to Arizona as he finalizes a draft bill. But, following the announcement of the federal suit, he said he may consider watering down one of the Arizona law’s most contentious elements.

Under the law, state officers are instructed to check immigration status if they have a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is in the country illegally. Sandstrom said his measure may require officers to meet the higher legal standard of “probable cause” to suspect someone of being undocumented before checking.

“I don’t want people of Hispanic descent to feel my bill is aimed at them,” he said.

A Utah law that took effect last year made it illegal to harbor or employ undocumented workers. Gov. Gary R. Herbert (R) has said he expects to sign new immigration legislation next year and is meeting with all sides to find a way forward.

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) touted a comprehensive set of measures against illegal immigration as the nation’s strictest when he signed it into law in 2008. The far-reaching legislation forced businesses to check the immigration status of their workers. Harboring and transporting illegal immigrants also became a state crime. State lawmakers are seeking to build on it and were quick this year to draw up an Arizona-style bill, introducing it less than a week after the Arizona measure was signed.

State Sen. Larry Martin (R) said in an interview that an Arizona-type measure was introduced too late this year. “But I have every expectation a new bill will be introduced in January,” he said. “As long as an officer has a lawful reason to question someone, and then a suspicion develops [that] they are an undocumented person, then I think our law enforcement folks ought to be able to pursue that,” he said.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

————————————————————————————————————————————————

From Media Matters For America:

Rush ‘FAT‘ Limbaugh: McVeigh attack happened because “Reno ordered tanks to be used against American citizens” in “Waco invasion.“

NOTES: 1. The Waco Siege began on February 28, 1993, when the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) attempted to execute a search warrant at the Branch Davidian ranch at Mount Carmel, a property located nine miles (14 km) east-northeast of Waco, Texas. An exchange of gunfire resulted in the deaths of four agents and six followers of David Koresh. A subsequent 51-day siege by the Federal Bureau of Investigation ended on April 19 when fire destroyed the compound. Seventy-six people (24 of them British nationals) died in the fire, including more than 20 children, two pregnant women, and Koresh himself. [ READ MORE ]

2. Oklahoma City Bombing: The Oklahoma City bombing was a bomb attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995. Timothy McVeigh detonated an explosive-filled truck that he had parked in front of the Federal Building. McVeigh’s co-conspirator, Terry Nichols, had assisted in the bomb preparation. It was the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11, 2001 attacks. The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6, and more than 680 people were injured. The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a sixteen-block radius, destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered building glass in a three mile square area. The bomb was estimated to have caused at least $652 million worth of property damage.[ READ MORE ]

LIAR Dick Morris tells purported new story about Clinton, Reno and Waco that’s “never been said before“

Ding-BAT Fox’s Steve Doocy on Americans who “trust” the government: “what are they thinking?“

Seditionist: Fox’s Glenn Beck Inciting (Wishing For) Violence

Beck: “This country, I think, is going to be brought down into violence, I hope to God not, I pray not”

Beck: We’re “on the eve of” “trouble,” “it’s coming”

Beck: “I hope to God I’m wrong” about upcoming crises but if you’re “honestly looking at the track record” I’m usually right

Beck: There were “anywhere between 36,000 and 150,000 political prisoners” under Woodrow Wilson, Obama is following his “playbook“

Limbaugh Questions Oklahoma City Memorials

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Writes: Mary Beth Marklein

Illegal immigrants face threat of no college

Some states are making it harder for illegal immigrants to attend college by denying in-state tuition benefits or banning undocumented students.

In the past two years, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and Oklahoma have refused in-state tuition benefits to students who entered the USA illegally with their parents but grew up and went to school in the state. That represents a reversal from earlier this decade, when 10 states passed laws allowing in-state rates for such students.

This summer, South Carolina became the first state to bar undocumented students from all public colleges and universities.

North Carolina’s community colleges in May ordered its 58 campuses to stop enrolling undocumented students after the state attorney general said admitting them may violate federal law.

“The new trend is to kick illegal aliens out of college altogether,” says William Gheen of Americans for Legal Immigration Political Action Committee, which opposes taxpayer subsidies for undocumented immigrants.

Josh Bernstein of the National Immigration Law Center, an illegal-immigrants advocate, says sweeping anti-immigration bills are “a very serious threat” to the overall illegal population.

Georgia, which barred undocumented students from in-state tuition rates in 2006, enacted laws in May preventing them from receiving state scholarships and certain student loans.

This fall, the University of Arkansas will require students to submit Social Security numbers and proof of residency. In May, Arkansas Department of Higher Education Director Jim Purcell warned that students without documentation “will not be considered as legally enrolled students” when determining an institution’s state funding.

Opponents say students shouldn’t be penalized for their parents’ actions. Helping them is “the right thing to do even if it’s unpopular,” says North Carolina state Rep. Pricey Harrison, a Democrat who introduced a bill that would prevent state institutions from asking about students’ immigration status.