Thread: Arizona passes strict illegal immigration act

Arizona's Tough New Law Against Illegal Immigrants
By Kevin O'Leary Friday, Apr. 16, 2010


A Guatemalan illegal immigrant prepares to board a plane during his deportation process in Phoenix, Ariz.


diggThe toughest anti-illegal-immigrant measure in a generation passed the Arizona legislature this week. If signed, as expected, by Republican governor Jan Brewer, the law will give local police sweeping new powers in regard to undocumented workers. Currently, immigration offenses are violations of federal, not state, law, and local police officers only can inquire about a person's immigration status if that person is suspected of another crime. Under SB1070, however, Arizona police will have the right to stop anyone on "reasonable suspicion" that they may be an illegal immigrant and can arrest them if they are not carrying a valid driver's license or identity papers.

Passions about illegal immigration run high in Arizona, a point of entry for thousands of undocumented workers going to the U.S. from Mexico, and tensions were heightened by the recent murder of a rancher in a remote border area where illegal crossings are rampant. With 6.6 million residents, Arizona's illegal-immigrant population is estimated to be half a million people.
(See the great wall of America on the Mexico border.)

Both proponents and opponents of the law are vociferous. "This criminalizes undocumented status and turns dishwashers, janitors, landscapers and our neighbors into criminals," says Chris Newman, legal director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. "The bill constitutes a complete disregard for the rights of nonwhites in Arizona. It effectively mandates racial profiling." But state senator Russell Pearce, a Republican, says his bill "will not change a thing for lawful citizens. It simply takes the handcuffs off law enforcement and allows them to do their job. Our legal citizens have a constitutional right to expect protection of federal law against noncitizens. When those laws are not enforced, our citizens are denied equal protection."
(Will a biometric Social Security card help the immigration crisis?)

All 35 Republicans in the lower Arizona house voted for the bill, while 21 Democrats voted against it. The bill passed the state senate earlier. Law enforcement in the state is split over the legislation, with rank and file supporting the measure and the Association of Chiefs of Police in opposition, saying it could hinder investigations by making the immigrant community hesitant to speak with police.

Appalled at the bill's harsh sweep, immigrant advocates are promising court challenges. "This is the most far-reaching anti-immigration bill in memory and it turns the presumption of innocence on its head," says Alessandra Meetze, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona. "It singles out the failure to carry ID as a reason to believe you are an undocumented alien. What this means is that citizens will need to carry papers with them at all times. It means people like my mother, who has brown skin and an accent, can be arrested and detained until it is confirmed that they are legally in the country."

"This is the most anti-immigrant legislation the U.S. has seen since the House bill of 2005 which set off huge demonstrations across the country," says Newman. "The sheer breadth of this bill is going to alter the national discussion." He says the bill does four things: criminalizes undocumented status, enlists local police in illegal-immigration enforcement, allows citizens to sue police departments if citizens think the police are not being sufficiently vigilant in enforcement and forbids any city from ignoring the state law and becoming a so-called sanctuary zone. "That's before you get to racial profiling," says Newman, "because anyone who looks Latino or has an accent can be swept up, arrested and detained while their immigration status is verified."

Can the law stand up to scrutiny? "There are some things that states can do and some that states can't do, but this law threads the needle perfectly," says Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri–Kansas City School of Law professor who helped write the legislation. He believes it will withstand constitutional challenge. "In the bill, Arizona only penalizes what is already a crime under federal law," says Kobach, a Yale Law School graduate and onetime counsel to former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft. "That constitutes concurrent enforcement in legal terms, which the courts have said is permissible." Says Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative think tank in Washington: "The rhetoric that this bill will create a police state is ridiculous. What this does is give police officers an extra tool in their tool kit."

"Enough is enough," says state senator Pearce, speaking about the increased violence along the Arizona border with Mexico. "One family has been burglarized 18 times and a number of officers have been killed and maimed in the line of duty dealing with illegal immigrants who are criminals. Our message is very clear," says Pearce. "Illegal aliens should find another state besides Arizona to visit."


http://www.time.com/time/nation/article ... Stories%29

It seems now we're finally reversing the process the illegal immigration lobby used on us, which is like the analogy of slowly boiling a frog in a pot, where the frog doesn't jump out and cooks to death if the water is heated slowly but jumps out immediately if it's thrown into the boiling pot. If 20 million illegals had been dumped on us all at once, there would have been such outrage that there would have been a national demand to deport all of them immediately. Instead what we got was a few coming in at a time until the country got used to having them here. Now, rather than deporting them all at once, which could cause a huge backlash, we're just accomplishing the same thing only more slowly. The Arizona law is a great step in the process.

Originally Posted by LAPhil

It seems now we're finally reversing the process the illegal immigration lobby used on us, which is like the analogy of slowly boiling a frog in a pot, where the frog doesn't jump out and cooks to death if the water is heated slowly but jumps out immediately if it's thrown into the boiling pot. If 20 million illegals had been dumped on us all at once, there would have been such outrage that there would have been a national demand to deport all of them immediately. Instead what we got was a few coming in at a time until the country got used to having them here. Now, rather than deporting them all at once, which could cause a huge backlash, we're just accomplishing the same thing only more slowly. The Arizona law is a great step in the process.

Exactly.

Nonetheless, it's been a steady daily stream for years and citizens have whined, wailed, screamed, lost and died waiting for politicians who should have heard their first squeak to finally submit to our Final Roar.

4/16/2010 1:33:00 PM
AG calls new immigration legislation 'troubling'



Attorney General Terry Goddard said anti-immigrant legislation awaiting final Senate action is "troubling.' But Goddard, a Democratic contender for governor, stopped short of saying the measure is illegal, either because of the civil rights issues or the possibility that it may intrude on the exclusive right of the federal government to deal with immigration.

By Howard Fischer



PHOENIX -- Attorney General Terry Goddard said anti-immigrant legislation awaiting final Senate action is "troubling.'

Goddard, speaking after a Thursday press conference announcing a raid on companies that shuttle illegal immigrants, also said SB 1070 may have "civil rights implications,' what with provisions that could be seen as an excuse to stop and question Hispanics.

But Goddard, a Democratic contender for governor, stopped short of saying the measure is illegal, either because of the civil rights issues or the possibility that it may intrude on the exclusive right of the federal government to deal with immigration.

He pointed out the current version of the measure, approved earlier this week by the House, still has to get final Senate approval before going to Gov. Jan Brewer. Goddard said there was some possibility it could change.

But Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, said he already has 17 votes lined up to approve the measure when it comes to the Senate floor, perhaps as early as Monday. And Pearce lashed out at Goddard, saying he's not only wrong on the law but is "pandering' to his Democratic base.

One provision which has caused some concern would make it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant and not have an "alien registration document,' something which, by definition, anyone in this country illegally would not have.

That is coupled with another section which requires police to make a reasonable attempt "when practicable, to determine the immigration status' of any person with whom they have "any lawful contact.' Those, taken together, have led to questions of whether it will lead to racial profiling and harassment of Hispanics who are U.S. citizens but aren't carrying any sort of acceptable proof.

Pearce said those fears are unwarranted. He pointed out that the legislation precludes police from considering race, color or national origin as the sole factor in checking identification.

That doesn't mean it can't be considered.

"Ninety percent of the illegal aliens in Arizona come from south of the border,' Pearce said. "So it certainly may be a factor.'

And Pearce said the bill requires a "lawful contact' in the first place, not just stopping people because they look like illegal immigrants.

Goddard said his concerns go beyond legal questions about SB 1070. He said he just returned from an economic development trip to Washington.

"One of the major questions we got there was, 'What's Arizona doing with these local efforts to take over federal law?' ' Goddard said.

"That's troubling to the investment community,' he continued. "So I think we need to be very conscious of what this can do to our image as a state across the country.'

Pearce said Goddard's position is not surprising, given that he opposed Proposition 200 in 2004 to require people to provide proof of citizenship before registering to vote and to bring identification to the polls. The initiative passed by a large margin anyway.

He said if Goddard doesn't like the efforts to crack down on illegal immigration he should go to another state "which is more friendly to his friends, the illegal aliens.'

"Tell him he ought to not pander too hard for them because they can't vote, thanks to Prop 200,' Pearce added.

John Morton, an assistant Homeland Security secretary in charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, who conducted Thursday's press conference, refused to comment on the proposed law. But he said the debate over SB 1070 "reflects the underlying need for comprehensive immigration reform.'

"It makes more sense than a patchwork of state laws addressing immigration,' Morton said.

Pearce said what's being considered by the administration amounts to "amnesty' because it would allow those who entered the country illegally to remain. Morton acknowledged one elements would be a "fair way for long-term illegal residents to address their status' but denied it would amount to amnesty.

Dennis Burke, the assistant U.S. Attorney for Arizona, also would not comment on SB 1070. But Burke, who served as a top aide to Janet Napolitano when she was Arizona governor -- and when she vetoed prior bills to let local officials go after illegal immigrants -- said bills like this "reflect a frustration they have at the state level as to what they can be doing because of the magnitude of this problem and the fact we haven't had immigration reform in this country.'

http://verdenews.com/Main.asp?SectionID ... leID=36003

I guess that flake attorney would be upset now that he is out of business, dang he may have to go out and find honest work.

Originally Posted by gunrunner532002

I guess that flake attorney would be upset now that he is out of business, dang he may have to go out and find honest work.

Yep ... he just might. And with the trucker's boycott we might need a hand backing some semis.