In this particular situation racial stereotyping MIGHT be appropriate, but it's the slippery slope logic. You give the government a blank check to racially profile and arrest without a warrant because someone's race is probable cause, that could lead to all kinds of unimaginable if the wrong person/people get power.
It'll lead to all kinds of unimaginable well before it reaches such sinister levels. Can you imagine the strain this is going to put on the court system? The police force? Detention facilities? The economy (by disrupting the work of citizens and illegals alike).
Something clearly needs to be done about immigration policy, but this is half-baked.
"I read an article" that this is actually GOP election to harass LEGAL Hispanics to get out of the state. Legal Hispanics vote 2 Dem to 1 Repug.
Were this so, we'd probably be seeing the same sort of legislative activity in Texas.
Then again, after the concerted effort to bring down ACORN the past few years, nothing would surprise me.
The timing of this bill was re ed. Illegals are leaving Arizona and other Southwest states in record numbers right now because they can't find work. Republicans seem focused on immigration, Democrats seem focused on healthcare, neither in party wants to address what is by far the biggest issue in this country.
LOL, I guess you mean the economy? No one is going to address the 6 banks that make of 60%+ of GDP. Anyway...
Let me get this right, please correct me where I'm wrong...when the bill was passed, the AZ Gov. said the Federal Government refused to tackle the problem (which to me is code for "Obama"), without acknowledging that the Republicans helped stopped GW from touching Immigration either. Shortly after, Lindsey Graham and Mitch Mcconnell said that America and Congress were not ready to tackle Immigration. WHAT?!?!
Cops shouldn't have more put on their plate by the state turning them into immigration officers. What if the Hispanic community stops cooperating with local police on routine issues? I actually am of the mindset, however twisted it may be, that the police won't ask a SINGLE PERSON for identification...but this is a PR disaster for the state government and law enforcement trying to posture like a lone wolf when the Federal Govement (aka Obama) won't do anything about Immigration. It's so obviously political, they don't care about that rancher that got killed or the footsteps that oddly led back to Mexico.
Also...the Kid from Star Trek just did a good expose on his show about the people that helped bring the Immigration Bill to AZ, bunch of crazy racists I tell ya!
That tea is trash anyway.
There's nothing wrong with enforcing illegal immigration laws, but this Arizona law goes too far. People should not be pulled over because they LOOK like they might be illegal aliens. This is a violation of peoples' rights and will hinder police from doing work they SHOULD be doing.
Just my opinion.
Agree completely. This is a bill most level headed Republicans and Democrats agree on. I like the idea of finally doing something about illegals, but someone's race isn't probable cause for an arrest.
Maybe you people should actually read the bill before making these asinine comments. This bill is not what you say it is and it specifically PROHIBITS racial profiling. It basically codifies the Federal law and takes great care to not violate civil rights.
If the Federal Government (Republicans and Democrats alike) would stop being so politically correct and actually enforce the immigration laws, the people of Arizona wouldn't have demanded this law be passed.
Love it! Not quite Operation but we are on our way!
the day when both illegal immigrants AND companies/people that hire them----
are BOTH prosecuted---equally---
will be the day when some kind of progress ---might be made--but that
WILL NEVER HAPPEN...
so until then...keep responding to YOUR inner prejudice and go after the little guy---while allowing the big guy $$$$---to laugh while you do his work...
too late for that jack. whether you like it or not, this country has already become irreversibly latino.
but we're all AMERICAN.
Crooky, is the level of su ion needed for questioning better defined in the bill? All I've read so far is things like this from the OP.
That's very open-ended.It also requires local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants;
Here is the main text of the bill - you can read it for yourself and determine if the comments made previously are valid.
History
8 U.S.C. § 1373(c) requires Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to respond to inquiries by federal, state, or local government agencies seeking to verify or ascertain the citizenship or immigration status of any individual within the jurisdiction of the agency for any purpose authorized by law, by providing the requested verification or status information.
Laws 2007, Ch. 279 enacted the Legal Arizona Workers Act (Act). The Act: expands aggravated taking the iden y of another person or en y to include the intent to obtain employment; prohibits an employer from intentionally employing an unauthorized alien or knowingly employing an unauthorized alien; requires the Attorney General (AG) or county attorney to investigate complaints and classifies filing a false and frivolous complaint as a class 3 misdemeanor; provides for license suspension for the first violation; requires license revocation on a second violation during a probationary period; and after December 31, 2007, requires every employer to utilize E-Verify to verify employment eligibility. Laws 2008, Chapter 152 further amended the Act.
Provisions
Enforcement of Immigration Law
· Prohibits law enforcement officials and law enforcement agencies of this state or counties, municipalities and political subdivisions from restricting or limiting the enforcement of the federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
· Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable su ion exists regarding the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation.
· Stipulates that if the person is arrested, the person’s immigration status must be determined before the person is released and must be verified with the federal government.
· Stipulates that a law enforcement official or agency cannot solely consider race, color or national origin when implementing these provisions, except as permitted by the U.S. or Arizona Cons ution.
· Specifies that a person is presumed to be lawfully present if the person provides any of the following:
Ø A valid Arizona driver license.
Ø A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
Ø A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
Ø A valid federal, state or local government issued identification, if the issuing en y requires proof of legal presence before issuance.
· Requires that if a person is convicted of any state or local law, on discharge from imprisonment or on the assessment of any monetary obligation imposed, ICE or U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) must be immediately notified.
· Authorizes a law enforcement agency to securely transport an unlawfully present alien to a federal facility.
· Requires a law enforcement agency to obtain judicial authorization before securely transporting an unlawfully present alien to a point of transfer that is outside of Arizona.
· Prohibits, except as provided in federal law, officials and agencies of counties, cities, towns or other political subdivisions from being prevented or restricted from sending, receiving or maintaining information relating to the immigration status, of any individual or exchanging that information with another governmental en y for the following official purposes:
Ø Determination of eligibility for any public benefit, service or license.
Ø Verification of any claim of legal domicile if legal domicile is required by law or judicial order.
Ø If the person is an alien, determination of the person’s compliance with federal registration laws.
Ø Pursuant to federal laws regarding communication between government agencies and federal immigration agencies.
· Stipulates that these provisions does not implement, authorize or establish and cannot be construed to implement authorize or establish the REAL ID Act of 2005, including the use of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID).
· Allows a person who is a legal resident of this state to bring an action in superior court to challenge officials and agencies of the state, counties, cities, towns or other political subdivisions that adopt or implement a policy that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
· Requires the court to order any that a violating en y pays a civil penalty of at least $1,000 and not to exceed $5,000 for each day that the policy has remained in effect after it has been found to be violating these provisions.
· States that the court will collect the penalty and transmit the collected monies to the state Treasurer for deposit in the Gang and Immigration Intelligence Team Enforcement Mission (GIITEM) Fund.
· Authorizes the court to award court costs and reasonable attorney fees to any person or any official or agency that prevails in a case brought under these provisions.
· Indemnifies officers against actions brought under these provisions, except if the officer has been adjudged to have acted in bad faith.
· Stipulates that these provisions are to be implemented consistent with federal immigration law protecting the civil right of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of US citizens.
im doing a research paper in US/LA relations on Operation .
would referencing this bill be a good introduction?
or should i play it conservative by saying that historians and policymakers champion the Bracero program as a success to foreign relations but the OW is an often-negated racist backlash to it? BP was an imperial allocation of labor resources and OW was a the racist backlash to it - imperialism not cooperation?
Last edited by The Reckoning; 04-27-2010 at 11:54 AM.
operation was backed by the CIA. i doubt we would ever get that out of hand again but the fact that it happened makes any concern over the current legislation valid.
I would like to see "reasonable su ion" here defined. I mean, if a cop pulls over someone who speaks poor English and looks Mexican, is that reasonable su ion? I would argue it isn't, but it might be interpreted as such. (I know it says later it can't solely consider race/color/national origin, hence I brought up the language issue.)· Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable su ion exists regarding the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation.
I not sure if that part of the bill would be considered cons utional. In one case, the SCOTUS has said that it's not mandatory to produce ID to police officers, but the situation was different.· Stipulates that if the person is arrested, the person’s immigration status must be determined before the person is released and must be verified with the federal government.
I think this section is heavy-handed, but I'm ok with other people holding opposite views.
A more libertarian take, from a letter to the American Spectator:
What's the right approach to dismantling the black market? Liberalization. The immigration black market only exists is because the government has made the legal market as bersome as it can.
True immigration reform makes legal channels more appealing, not less. That means lightening the paperwork and the regulatory burden, and eliminating quotas. The more unattractive legality becomes, the more attractive illegality looks in comparison.
Black markets are anathema to a free society. Murder, theft, smuggling, and even slavery are part and parcel of immigrant black markets. They are also easily avoidable - just shrink the black market by making legal immigration easier.
Not a fan.
If a state wants to do something about illegal immigration -- which is a federal responsibility -- it could reduce the state-provided benefits and services made available to illegal immigrants, or prohibit them altogether consistent with the law. It's a harsh option and it still wouldn't eliminate the main economic incentives that bring many immigrants to this country . . . but it would at least make it harder for the do-nothings and criminals to live comfortably.
But to task local law enforcement with immigration is wrong-headed. It's an invitation to police-state creepiness.
soooo nobodys going to help me with my research paper...
I think I'm going to go to Arizona and steal from some illegals. They definitely won't go to the police now.
probably not but better make sure who you steal from first or they may find your head in sonora.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote