Reply With Quote
good luck arguing in court that a law that on its face prohibits racial profiling is going to allow racial profiling.
http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblog...on-law-ce.html
MALDEF, ACLU, Immigration Law Center to sue Arizona
By Elaine Ayala on Apr 29, 10 10:40 AM
In less than an hour, at 11 a.m. MST, representatives of MALDEF, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Arizona and the National Immigration Law Center will stand in front of the State Capitol Building in Phoenix and say they're suing the state over SB 1070, a law that criminalizes undo ented immigrants, over what they believe is an uncons utional law.
Under federal law being in the country without legal do ents is not a crime. It is a civil offense. Unless an immigrant commits a serious crime, under federal law, they are not imprisoned. Local law enforcement agencies do not lock them up, either.
And, under present law, no American of Hispanic descent is routinely questioned and asked to produce a birth certificate or passport for being in their own country.
That is called racial profiling, and that is at the center of legal challenges, which will be mounted against Arizona. Across the country, religious leaders, police chiefs and others have said they do not support SB 1070.
Giving police the power to detain and arrest people who are immigrants or appear to be immigrants is "based on a very low legal standard, possibly leading to the profiling of individuals based upon their appearance, manner of speaking, or ethnicity," several Catholic bishops said.
"The new law essentially requires police to demand 'papers' from anyone they suspect isn't authorized to be in the United States," a press release from the ACLU says.
Among those getting ready to speak in Arizona are Thomas A. Saenz, MALDEF president and general counsel; Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the ACLU of Arizona; Dolores Huerta, co-founder of the United Farm Workers of America; Richard Chavez, civil rights leader; and Linda Ronstadt, multi-Grammy winning artist and human rights advocate.
"Fifteen years ago, MALDEF, ACLU and NILC successfully challenged Proposition 187 in the state of California, where a voter-approved initiative required proof of legal status to access virtually all public services," the press release says. "The enactment of Prop 187, as it was commonly referred to, tore apart schools and communities across the state as fear and su ion became pervasive, and the state wasted tens of millions of dollars defending a law ultimately struck down as uncons utional."
good luck arguing in court that a law that on its face prohibits racial profiling is going to allow racial profiling.
Interesting. I assumed they would wait for someone to be prosecuted under the statute and then, challenge it in the courts.
Good luck to the political party that alienates Latino voters.
because the welfare state matters above all else.
Well, not exactly - the law implies that law enforcement can consider the race of the individual. It's just says that race cannot be the sole consideration for questioning.
A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY,
31 CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY
32 CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF
33 THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR
34 ARIZONA CONS UTION.
hey, keep the hearst pubs to two lines and a link dammitt!
good for them, although i would rather see a stronger case come from holder.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
