Why doesn't it surprise me

[Uncle Ted]

This law is utter nonsense. I think people should be here legally, and I think that Arizona should give papers to everyone who isn't here legally, but is working. Tax them, and get economic benefits in the public sphere from their presence. Force the federal government's hand by making them HAVE to do something because you've done something positive.

Draconian measures like this law are a further erosion of our freedoms, and I'm boycotting everything Arizona until it's rescinded (including unpainted furniture).

The problem isn't that people are here illegally; no, the problem is that we arbitrarily make it illegal for them to be here; they are a net benefit to our nation.

Yes, studies show that undocumented immigrates benefit the economy. Arizona might find out the hard way they are most likely hurting their economy and slowing their recovery with this law. In addition, people believe that undocumented immigrates are not paying their way when it comes to taxes. The same study linked above states that, on average, undocumented immigrates pay for more in taxes than what benefits they receive. In other words, it seems they are paying more than their share in taxes.

It seems that Arizona created this law because the public and law makers felt that the increase in undocumented immigrates increased the violent crime rate. It seems, however, that is not the case either. As the undocumented immigrate population has gone up the number of violent crimes in this country have gone down. In fact, Arizona's violent crime rate in 2008 (447 for every 100,000 people) is less than the national average (454 for every 100,000 people). Of course, one could argue that violent crimes rates have decreased due to other factors such as tougher laws (e.g. "three strikes"), increase in gun ownership, and/or legalized abortion.

The good news is that Arizona's legislature did pass an amendment prohibiting any use of race. Maybe this was the result of[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2VSGEWzEW0"]YouTube- Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) doesn't know what an "illegal immigrant" looks like[/nomedia].

[NorthShoreCoug]

A couple of points here that aren't directly on topic, but tangentially relevant:

First, the way our immigration system currently operates is immoral and evil. The status quo is not acceptable. The "illegal but we'll let them stay" method creates a shadow society that is exploited. Something needs to be done to change the current system.

Second, police can already stop just about any driver they wish, legally, and question them. I live in a state with "primary" offense seatbelt laws (which I detest, but that is another subject...), so if they "don't see" that you're belted in, they can stop you. Or if your tailight doesn't work. Or your license plates aren't properly attached. Or if you turn without turning on your blinker. Or if you "drive erratically". Or... you get the picture. Do you think any of this translates into racial (or other) profiling at times by police?

About 15 yrs back, I was pulled over and ticketed on I-80 near Wendover for driving 3 MPH over the speed limit. The police officer used my slight nervousness as pretext for asking to look in my trunk. I had a microwave in my trunk that I was taking to my sister in San Francisco, who I was going to visit. He called in the serial number to see if it was stolen, and just generally gave me a hard time. I realized that I must have fit the profile of a drug smuggler in a drug corridor - solitary male - so he used the speeding pretext to pull me over and investigate.

[Moliere]

What? If they get pulled over for a moving violation and it turns out they can't speak English, card them. Doesn't matter if they're Russian, Pakistani, Uruguayan, Ethiopian or Mexican.

So you want to lock up Shaq?

[Surfah]

How does a driver's license prove citizenship? Don't they let non-citizens get licenses?

In Virginia it is required to show proof of citizenship or legal residence.

Here's a list of approved documents (You must produce originals, no photocopies accepted):

• Birth document issued by a U.S. state, jurisdiction, or territory. (Birth documents issued by a hospital, and foreign birth certficates are not acceptable.)
• Unexpired or expired U.S. passport or U.S. passport card
• Unexpired Employment Authorization Card (I-688A, I-688B or I-766)
• Unexpired foreign passport with an unexpired or expired visa and I-94
• Unexpired foreign passport with an I-94W or an I-551 stamp
• Resident Alien Card unexpired or expired for not more than one year
• Permanent Resident Card (I-551) unexpired or expired for not more than one year
• Unexpired Conditional Resident Alien Card (I-551) valid for two years
• Unexpired Temporary Resident ID Card
• Consular Report of Birth Abroad (FS-240)
• Certificate of Birth Abroad (FS-545)
• Certification of Report of Birth of a U.S. Citizen (DS-1350)
• U.S. Certificate of Naturalization
• U.S. Certificate of Naturalization or Citizenship
• U.S. Citizen Identification Card (I-179 or I-197)
• Virginia DMV-issued driver's license unexpired or expired for not more than one year
• Virgina DMV-issued learner's/instruction permit unexpired or expired for not more than one year. If presented by an individual age 19 years or older, the learner's/instruction permit must have been issued after September 21, 2001.
• Virginia DMV-issued photo identification card (excluding child ID cards) issued after September 21, 2001 unexpired or expired for not more than one year
• Unexpired driver's license or learner's permit with photograph issued by a U.S. state (other than Virginia), jurisdiction, or territory, or a Canadian province. The driver's license or learner's permit may not be less than 60 days old. (Other countries and international driver's license are not accepted.)
• Unexpired ID card with photograph issued by a U.S. state (other than Virginia), jurisdiction or territory, or a Canadian province. The ID card may not be less than 60 days old. (School employee ID cards and Native American citizenship cards and not accepted.)
• Unexpired U.S. Active Duty/Retiree/Reservist Military ID Card (DD-2 or Common Access Card)(Military dependent ID cards are not acceptable primary documents.)
• Unexpired Refugee Travel Document (I-571)
• Asylees or applicants for asylum may present an application for asylum along with documentation from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service or U.S. Immigration Court indicating either receipt or approval of the application.

Then you have to demonstrate proof of residency in the state which requires a utility bill in your name, SS Benefits Statement, recent paycheck stub, etc.

[UtahDan]

I think I am starting to get a better grip on the legalities of this, but let me ask those who oppose this again, what about it offends your primarily? If possible, direct your critique to this law as opposed to the system in general.

[KillerDog]

I think I am starting to get a better grip on the legalities of this, but let me ask those who oppose this again, what about it offends your primarily? If possible, direct your critique to this law as opposed to the system in general.

My problem with the law is that I believe it is a statutory expansion of the Terry Stop. It requires an officer who has made "lawful contact" with a person to gain proof of legal immigration status or citizenship upon "reasonable suspicion." If I recall correctly, this mirrors the language in Terry v. Ohio (or is it Ohio v. Terry, I can never remember) but not the rationale behind a case that I believe was wrongly decided in the first place but at least had a good reason for the 4th Amendment violation (safety of the stopping officer). In Terry, the officer was allowed to do a pat down of someone who they had stopped on reasonable suspicion that a crime was being committed. The point of the pat down was to make sure the officer wouldn't get shot by a concealed weapon. Any fruits of that lawful pat down could be used as evidence. Subsequent case law has made it clear any reason by the stopping officer is "reasonable suspicion." Thus, the Arizona law will allow officers to stop people for any reason (which they could already do under Terry) as long as they could testify in Court that whatever made them suspicious was, in their experience, reasonable. The important part for me is that now, after stopping a person for nothing, the officer is now required to "determine immigration status" which allows him to treat anyone without identification as an illegal. He/she is put in jail until immigration status can be proven. The result is an expansion in the power of the police to jail you for no purpose as citizens are not required to carry identification of any type.

(Sorry for the poorly drafted response but I don't have either the time of the inclination to draft better on a web site.)

[byu71]

I watched briefly channel 5 where a discussion was going on between the SLC Chief of Police and some politician, can't remember his name.

I think the chief said this type of Arizona thing is profiling and he doesn't want his policeman doing that. I will take his word for it, but police profile all the time. For instance, they will sit outside bars, follow a patron, pick them up on some false deal like, illegal turn, taillight, etc. and then make them take a breathalizer. I am OK with that, I don't drink, but don't go on TV and say you guys don't profile and think everyone out there is dumb enough to believe that.

Another thing the politician said was that some high percentage of illegals committed the murders in SLC. The chief basically called him a racist for saying that. If the fact is correct, why is it racist to state the that fact?

Now, if this is not a fact and the guy is making it up, I then can see how it is racist.

[KillerDog]

Now, if this is not a fact and the guy is making it up, I then can see how it is racist.

I doubt it is the fact and the chief was probably calling him on that fact. I looked around for a while last week to see if there was any truth to all the "illegal alien crime wave" stuff being bandied about. I couldn't find anything to support the position that illegals commit crime at a higher than average rate. If anything, the indication is that they commit it at a lower than average rate.

[cowboy]

How does this law differ from the way the Border Patrol already works. It's been a few years since we've had migrant labor, but when we did, the BP would periodically make the rounds and weed them out. If that ain't profiling I don't know what is.

So does this law give any more power to the police than the BP already has?

[byu71]

I doubt it is the fact and the chief was probably calling him on that fact. I looked around for a while last week to see if there was any truth to all the "illegal alien crime wave" stuff being bandied about. I couldn't find anything to support the position that illegals commit crime at a higher than average rate. If anything, the indication is that they commit it at a lower than average rate.

Neither the host or chief disputed his figure. The host seemed taken back he would say it and the chief basically called him a racist.

There was something the attorney general said back in I think Sept. or October. It was on TV, but apparently the TV station has taken down the link now. It is a very touchy subject.

[byu71]

How does this law differ from the way the Border Patrol already works. It's been a few years since we've had migrant labor, but when we did, the BP would periodically make the rounds and weed them out. If that ain't profiling I don't know what is.

So does this law give any more power to the police than the BP already has?

Border Patrol is federal aren't they. I think the big gripe is that the State is actually going to do something.

[cowboy]

Border Patrol is federal aren't they. I think the big gripe is that the State is actually going to do something.

Then how is the law racist if it is simply a state level enforcement of a federal law, using the same enforcement techniques as the feds?

[byu71]

Then how is the law racist if it is simply a state level enforcement of a federal law, using the same enforcement techniques as the feds?

Because "racist" is a good code word for "you are a dirty rotten scumbag and your only goal in life is to do harm to the poor and downtrodden."

The federal law for the most part is ignored. It isn't because all these people who ignore it are such wonderful people, they just don't have the same problems arise that folks in border states have and it doesn't affect them.

[beefytee]

I think the difference is Border Patrol does their research and finds where the problem is and specifically targets it.

Whereas police with simply be targeting random people who they interact with and the easy way to do this seems to be based on race.

[frank ryan]

Because "racist" is a good code word for "you are a dirty rotten scumbag and your only goal in life is to do harm to the poor and downtrodden."

The federal law for the most part is ignored. It isn't because all these people who ignore it are such wonderful people, they just don't have the same problems arise that folks in border states have and it doesn't affect them.

I worry that the bill will cause citizens and those here legally to be harassed and suspected because of their race. I don't think the police who are required to carry out the law should be considered racist.
I also don't this is going to solve the immigration issue.
Do you like the bill?