Skip to comments.Things You Might Not Know About the Arizona Immigration Law
Posted on 06/01/2010 4:59:19 AM PDT by Catsrus
Arizona recently passed an immigration bill which, if you listen only to the opponents of the bill, must surely give police the right to arrest all Mexicans and shoot them on site. But does it? In fact, if you read the bill, you will find that it simply enforces federal immigration laws that already exist. If you want to read the bill (SB1070), I recommend that you read it on the Arizona legislature website.
The text of the law begins: The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona. It continues: The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.
Law enforcement officials can act when there is reasonable suspicion that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States. Law enforcement must make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of the person, and verify it with the federal government. The law is to be implemented in accordance with federal immigration laws, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens. There is also provision for the person to sue if there has been a violation of the law.
There is nothing wrong with the Arizona law, and it seems that those who complain about it are doing so to gain political advantage among certain groups. Former Arizona Governor, and now Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, admits that she has not read the Arizona law, but still declares that it is a bad law. You might recall that Napolitano has been the subject of much controversy during her tenure as Homeland
(Excerpt) Read more at voe.org ...
That's it in a nutshell - most of the complainers and appeasers have never even read the bill. What's it, all of about 13 or 14 pages? What do you expect?
The bill is also the result of years of trial and error. There were previous bills that were struck down by the AZ legislature that were more restrictive. AZ didn’t just wake up one day with an idea for a bill to jail and ship out Mexicans like the kenyan would like you to believe.
More private citizens have read the AZ law than all the people in Obama’s Administration, and Pelozi/Reid’s Congress.
I read it in 38 minutes, 16 seconds. Any one of the ‘leaders’ could have read it while their drivers brought them to their offices or while they ate a sandwich at their desks.
I read it in 38 minutes, 16 seconds. Any one of the leaders could have read it while their drivers brought them to their offices or while they ate a sandwich at their desks.
You don’t really expect our elected officials to eat ‘on the cheap’, a sandwich at their desks, do you? They get Kobe’ beef, Beef bourguignon, coq au vin, etc. Nothing us ‘mere taxpayers’ would afford, or like.
Frankly, I’m a meat and potatoes kind of guy; but being a native Texan, I repeat myself.
Make it illegal in the State of Arizona for an alien to not register with the government, thus being an “illegal alien” (already the case at the federal level: 8 USC 1306a; USC 1304e)
Allow police to detain people where there is a “reasonable suspicion” that they’re illegal aliens (see the recent court case Estrada v. Rhode Island for an idea of what “reasonable suspicion” might entail)
Prohibits sanctuary cities (already prohibited at the federal level, 8 USC 1373) and allows citizens to sue any such jurisdiction
Reality vs. Myth: SB1070
Myth No. 1: The law requires aliens to carry identification that they weren’t already required to carry.
Reality: It has been a federal crime (8 United States Code Section 1304(a) or 1306(e)) since 1940 for aliens to fail to carry their registration documents. The Arizona law reaffirms the federal law. Anyone who has traveled abroad knows that other nations have similar requirements. The majority requests for documentation will take place during the course of other police business such as traffic stops. Because Arizona allows only lawful residents to obtain licenses, an officer must presume that someone who produces one is legally in the country. (See News Hour clip 3:45 seconds in)
Myth No. 2: The law will encourage racial profiling.
Reality: The Arizona law reduces the chances of racial profiling by requiring officers to contact the federal government when they suspect a person is an illegal alien as opposed to letting them make arrests on their own assessment as federal law currently allows. Section 2 was amended (by HB2162) to read that a law enforcement official “may not consider race, color, or national origin” in making any stops or determining an alien’s immigration status (previously, they were prohibited in “solely” considering those factors). In addition, all of the normal Fourth Amendment protections against racial profiling still apply.
Myth No. 3: “Reasonable suspicion” is a meaningless term that will permit police misconduct.
Reality: “Reasonable suspicion” has been defined by the courts for decades (the Fourth Amendment itself proscribes “unreasonable searches and seizures”). One of the most recent cases, Estrada v. Rhode Island, provides an example of the courts refining of “reasonable suspicion:”
A 15 passenger van is pulled over for a traffic violation. The driver of the van had identification but the other passengers did not (some had IDs from a gym membership, a non-driver’s license card from the state, and IDs issued from the Guatemalan Consulate). The passengers said they were on their way to work but they had no work permits. Most could not speak English but upon questioning, admitted that they were in the United States illegally. The officer notified ICE and waited three minutes for instructions.
The SB1070 provision in question reads:
“For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state . . . where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
Myth No. 4: The law will require Arizona police officers to stop and question people.
Reality: The law only kicks in when a police officer stopped, detained, or arrested someone (HB2162). The most likely contact is during the issuance of a speeding ticket. The law does not require the officer to begin questioning a person about his immigration status or to do anything the officer would not otherwise do.
Only after a stop is made, and subsequently the officer develops reasonable suspicion on his own that an immigration law has been violated, is any obligation imposed. At that point, the officer is required to call ICE to confirm whether the person is an illegal alien.
The Arizona law is actually more restrictive than federal law. In Muehler v. Mena (2005), the Supreme Court ruled that officers did not need reasonable suspicion to justify asking a suspect about their immigration status, stating that the court has held repeatedly that mere police questioning does not constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment). Source = http://www.numbersusa.com/dfax?jid=475466&lid=9&rid=123&series=tp06MAY10&tid=999725
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.