What is Going On in Arizona?

[nathanm]

If it is legal to just be here, how is deportation justified?

It's civil deportation, not criminal. Your question is like asking how it is justified that those who hold a visa (and even lawful permanent residents) can be denied entry at the whim of the ICE officer at the port of entry. That's the law. Read title 8, it's rather enlightening.

[jamesrage]

First, the legislature passes the toughest immigration law in the country, now its house passes a bill requiring Obama to produce a birth certificate if he expects to get on the ballot in 2012:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/04/21/national/a152843D73.DTL&type=politics

Good for Arizona for passing the anti-illegal immigration bill. I am sure all the pro-illegals and race parasites will claim that this will lead to racial profiling even though a lot of officers in Arizona of hispanic decent.


Although the birth certificate bill is aimed at anyone wishing to run for president. I do not see it satisfying the conspiracy loons seeing how they won't accept an offical copy that has been verified. So they loons will probably just claim Obama just ink washed a real birth certificate and slapped his name on it.

[fotd]

Racist roots of Arizona Law....

Gotcha yet?

[Gaspar]

So. . .after looking at all of the outrage, and the hysteria, I read the bill.  Here's the passage that has caused this uproar.

"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."

I've underlined a few important things.
Lawfull Contact means that the officer cannot just stop someone unless their is a lawfull reason to do so.

Reasonable Suspicion means that the officer must have reason to suspect the person is not a legal citizen i.e. no ability to produce identification, or the officer is presented with false identification.

Reasonable attempt to determine immigration status means that the officer will most likely ask the person for valid identification or obtain evidence to the contrary.

Once it is determined that someone is illegal, that person is turned over to federal immigration officers.  The bill has nothing to do with deportation by state officials, or imprisonment or anything else advertised by the media Bozos (no offence to Bozo).

The bill does not condone or promote racial profiling, in fact it re-emphasizes current federal and state laws against profiling. Officers are prohibited from stopping people based solely on race or color.

The only thing this bill does is make it legal for an officer to ask a suspect if he/she is a citizen of the United States.  It only gives the officer power to contact federal authorities if evidence of a federal crime exists.

I think the main problem is that people didn't read the bill, instead they listened to the inflammatory media.

[Conan71]

I'm assuming one of the varied reasons an OHP, TPD, or TCSD deputy wants to see my driver's license is to help determine my immigration status if I'm stopped.  I don't see anything heinous about the Arizona law, other than the whole thing about eating little babies.  I'd say the "racial profiling" thing is way over-blown here.  Besides, it would be ethnic profiling, would it not?

[we vs us]

The "lawful contact" could be "reasonable suspicion."  In other words, the language seems to state that the enforcement officer could use his suspicion as the reason to make lawful contact and then challenge the person's citizenship.

And, sure, we can call it ethnic profiling if we want . . . but it's still profiling, yo. 

[Conan71]

The "lawful contact" could be "reasonable suspicion."  In other words, the language seems to state that the enforcement officer could use his suspicion as the reason to make lawful contact and then challenge the person's citizenship.

I think this puts the kabosh on your point: "Lawfull Contact means that the officer cannot just stop someone unless their is a lawfull reason to do so"

Same thing they do every day with speeders, suspected ticket scofflaws, etc.  It sounds, from what Gaspar posted, that it affords protection against profiling.  So long as an officer asks every "lawful contact" about their immigration or citizenship status, there's no room to call it discrimination so long as everyone is subject to this line of questioning. 

[jamesrage]

So. . .after looking at all of the outrage, and the hysteria, I read the bill.  Here's the passage that has caused this uproar.

"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."

I've underlined a few important things.
Lawfull Contact means that the officer cannot just stop someone unless their is a lawfull reason to do so.

Reasonable Suspicion means that the officer must have reason to suspect the person is not a legal citizen i.e. no ability to produce identification, or the officer is presented with false identification.

Reasonable attempt to determine immigration status means that the officer will most likely ask the person for valid identification or obtain evidence to the contrary.

Once it is determined that someone is illegal, that person is turned over to federal immigration officers.  The bill has nothing to do with deportation by state officials, or imprisonment or anything else advertised by the media Bozos (no offence to Bozo).

The bill does not condone or promote racial profiling, in fact it re-emphasizes current federal and state laws against profiling. Officers are prohibited from stopping people based solely on race or color.

The only thing this bill does is make it legal for an officer to ask a suspect if he/she is a citizen of the United States.  It only gives the officer power to contact federal authorities if evidence of a federal crime exists.

I think the main problem is that people didn't read the bill, instead they listened to the inflammatory media.

The fact is pro-illegal oppose anything that will curd illegal immigration and label racist,compare it to Nazi Germany and all kinds of other nonsense. Pro-illegals do not have a leg to stand on in the illegal immigration debate so they have to resort to lies.

[Conan71]

Did you say "curd"?

[Red Arrow]

It the special slow setting kind used to make long lasting dividers between the street and sidewalk.

[Cats Cats Cats]

The fact is pro-illegal oppose anything that will curd illegal immigration and label racist,compare it to Nazi Germany and all kinds of other nonsense. Pro-illegals do not have a leg to stand on in the illegal immigration debate so they have to resort to lies.

The federal government should just do their job and this stuff wouldn't be needed.  There is something to be said though for people being asked for their papers in the streets.

[Gaspar]

The "lawful contact" could be "reasonable suspicion."  In other words, the language seems to state that the enforcement officer could use his suspicion as the reason to make lawful contact and then challenge the person's citizenship.

And, sure, we can call it ethnic profiling if we want . . . but it's still profiling, yo. 

That's not new to the law.  That already exists.  An officer can make "lawful contact" with you for any reason.  He can walk up to you and say "May I see some ID." 

This law simply changes what he can do after that point. . .If you say "NO" or "I don't have any," or give him false identification, he can then ask about your immigration status, and if you can produce no documentation indicating that you are here legally he can refer you to federal immigration officers to determine your status.  In the past, he had to set you free unless you were suspected of committing a crime under his jurisdiction. 

You can slice this several ways, but all it does is make federal law more enforceable. 

[custosnox]

Just reading a story on this, and here is a nice little excerpt from it that counters what Gaspers take on it

Police can detain and demand papers from anyone they have "lawful contact" with, but since the law defines illegal immigrants as trespassing when in any part of the United States, this gives the police the freedom to question people who are otherwise not breaking the law or engaging in suspicious activity. Those found to be in the state illegally can be thrown in jail for six months and fined $2,500, a harsher penalty than the federal punishment of deportation.

[Gaspar]

The federal government should just do their job and this stuff wouldn't be needed.  There is something to be said though for people being asked for their papers in the streets.

I agree.  However, we have to engage in some cross-over and cooperation between federal and state law enforcement.  Otherwise we would have to grow our federal law enforcement organization to duplicate state efforts.  It would be, and to some extent already is, a huge waste of resources.

If local officers were simply given the power to help enforce federal law in this matter, we would be on the road to more legal immigrants, and fewer illegal aliens. 

The racial profiling issue is a childish logic trap in this case. 

[Gaspar]

Just reading a story on this, and here is a nice little excerpt from it that counters what Gaspers take on it

Yeah I read that a few days ago in the AP, and expanded upon in Huff and other sites, however in the actual bill the only fines they are subject to is Jail costs and an initial assessment of $500 (and twice that if a repeat offender) if they are found to be in violation by an authorized federal agent.  Personally I think they should be required to pay their transportation back to their country of origin too.  Any monetary fine is silly.  Do you think we can collect this?  Perhaps we should send them home with an invoice.

There is no mention what so ever of 6 months detention.  It's very straight forward. I have a PDF of the bill if anyone is interested.  It's a quick read at 17 pages.