PHOENIX (AP) - A federal judge will hear arguments Thursday from

lawyers for the governor, the federal government and civil rights

groups over whether Arizona's new immigration law should take

effect in a week.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton will consider a request by the

U.S. Justice Department to block enforcement of the law. She also

will hear arguments in a challenge by civil rights groups over

whether the law should be put on hold and whether that lawsuit

should be thrown out of court.

The judge has said she wasn't making any promises on whether she

would make those rulings before the law takes effect on July 29.

The law requires officers, while enforcing other laws, to check

a person's immigration status if there's a reasonable suspicion

that the person is here illegally. It also bans people from

blocking traffic when they seek or offer day-labor services on

streets and prohibits illegal immigrants from soliciting work in

public places.

Since Gov. Jan Brewer signed the measure into law on April 23,

it has inspired rallies in Arizona and elsewhere by advocates on

both sides of the immigration debate. Some opponents have advocated

a tourism boycott of Arizona.

It also led an unknown number of illegal immigrants to leave

Arizona for other U.S. states or their home countries and prompted

seven challenges by the Justice Department, civil rights groups,

two Arizona police officers, a Latino clergy group and a researcher

from Washington.

Justice Department lawyers contend that local police shouldn't

be allowed to enforce the law because, in part, it's already

disrupting the United States' relations with Mexico and other

countries.

Attorneys for Brewer argue that the federal government based its

challenge on misconceptions of what the law would do and that

Washington's inadequate immigration enforcement has left the state

with heavy costs for educating, incarcerating and providing health

care for illegal immigrants.

In the challenge by civil rights groups, Brewer and other

officials said the lawsuit should be thrown out because the groups

don't allege a real threat of harm from enforcing the new law and

instead base their claims on speculation.

The civil rights groups said their clients will suffer imminent

harm, such as a social service organization that will have to

divert resources from its programs to instead assist those affected

by the new law.