Replies

Judge Susan Bolton granted a preliminary injunction which prevents implementation of two main elements of the legislation: the requirement that police determine the immigration status of people they arrest or question, and the part of the new law that would make it a state crime for a foreigner to be in Arizona without registration papers.

You can see the wisdom in this? When I got pulled over, I had to produce license, registration and insurance. If I did not have even a single one of these, I must then prove my identity to the courts. And this is law already on the books. How is the Arizona law interfering any more than this?

The only thing that Arizona is trying to do is trying to enforce what Obama won't.

When I got pulled over, I had to produce license, registration and insurance. If I did not have even a single one of these, I must then prove my identity to the courts. And this is law already on the books. How is the Arizona law interfering any more than this?

You will only be required to show identification if you are legal. If you are illegal it would be unfair because some of those who may appear to be illegal, may in fact, be legal. So if you ask legal citizens if they are indeed legal citizens, they, under the rules would be required to show identification, however, because you cannot ask illegals to show identification, you are engaged in an inherent bias against those who are here legally. Trying to ascertain who is legal and who is not legal is a direct violation of the rule that you cannot ask those who are here illegally for identification. Because you cannot only ask legals for identification, and you cannot ask illegals for identification, you can only make said requests if you know a priori who is in fact a legal resident and who is not. However, the only way to truly know who is legal and who is not (apart from taking their words for it) is to examine the proper documentation of the individual in question. All legals would be required to have identification, they just could not be required to produce the identification. Unless, of course the legal residence had done something illegal, like skip out on parole or robbed a bank. Then, the police can check their identification, because this is how a lot of fugitives are caught. Of course, if they had done something illegal, than they exempted from having to show identification, and people who had not committed a crime should not be prejudically treated like someone who had. Susan Bolton's wisdom and logic in this matter, it seems to me, is unparalleled.