Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > Priority Topics Section > Immigration

Immigration Topics relating to the subject of US Immigration

WELCOME BACK!.............NEW EFFORTS AHEAD..........CHECK BACK SOON.........UPDATE YOUR EMAIL FOR NEW NOTIFICATIONS.........
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-13-2010, 04:50 PM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default YAAAAA!!! Arizona passes strict illegal immigration act

Arizona passes strict illegal immigration act
The bill directs police to determine the immigration status of noncriminals if there is a 'reasonable suspicion' they are undocumented. Immigrant rights groups say it amounts to a police state.
Reporting from Denver
Arizona lawmakers on Tuesday approved what foes and supporters agree is the toughest measure in the country against illegal immigrants, directing local police to determine whether people are in the country legally.

The measure, long sought by opponents of illegal immigration, passed 35 to 21 in the state House of Representatives.



The state Senate passed a similar measure earlier this year, and Republican Gov. Jan Brewer is expected to sign the bill.

The bill's author, State Sen. Russell Pearce, said the law simply "takes the handcuffs off of law enforcement and lets them do their job."

But police were deeply divided on the matter, with police unions backing it but the state police chief's association opposed the bill, contending it could erode trust with immigrants who could be potential witnesses.

Immigrant rights groups were horrified, and contended that Arizona had been transformed into a police state.

"It's beyond the pale," said Chris Newman, legal director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. "It appears to mandate racial profiling."

The bill, known as SB 1070, makes it a misdemeanor to lack proper immigration paperwork in Arizona. It also requires police officers, if they form a "reasonable suspicion" that someone is an illegal immigrant, to determine the person's immigration status.

Currently, officers can inquire about someone's immigration status only if the person is a suspect in another crime. The bill allows officers to avoid the immigration issue if it would be impractical or hinder another investigation.

Citizens can sue to compel police agencies to comply with the law, and no city or agency can formulate a policy directing its workers to ignore the law -- a provision that advocates say prevents so-called "sanctuary" orders that police not inquire about people's immigration status.

The bill cements the position of Arizona, whose border with Mexico is the most popular point of entry for illegal immigrants into this country, as the state most aggressively using its own laws to fight illegal immigration. In 2006 the state passed a law that would dissolve companies with a pattern of hiring illegal immigrants. Last year it made it a crime for a government worker to give improper benefits to an illegal immigrant.

Mark Krikorian at the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C., think tank that advocates tougher immigration enforcement, said the new law is a logical extension of the state's previous enforcement efforts.

"It makes sense that they would be the first to do it since they're ground zero for illegal immigration," he said.

Krikorian added that he doubted the law would be used much. "Obviously, their prosecutors aren't going to go out and prosecute every illegal alien," he said. "It gives police and prosecutors another tool should they need it."

Opponents, however, raised the specter of officers untrained in immigration law now being required to determine who is in the country legally. They noted that though the bill says race cannot solely be used to form a suspicion about a person's legality, it implicitly allows it to be a factor.

"A lot of U.S. citizens are going to be swept up in the application of this law for something as simple as having an accent and leaving their wallet at home," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, president of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona.

The ACLU and other groups have vowed to sue to block the bill from taking effect should Brewer sign it. They note that a federal court struck down a New Hampshire law in 2005 that said illegal immigrants were trespassing, declaring that only the federal government has the authority to enforce immigration. Another provision of the Arizona law, which makes day laborers illegal, violates the 1st Amendment, critics contend.

The issue of local enforcement of immigration laws has been especially heated in Arizona, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has taken an aggressive stance, conducting sweeps in immigrant-heavy neighborhoods to round up illegal immigrants.

His actions have drawn a civil rights investigation from the U.S. Department of Justice but strong praise from Arizonans. Other agencies have argued against Arpaio's stance, saying that they need illegal immigrants to trust them enough to report crimes.

Brewer, a Republican, has not taken a public stance on the bill. She replaced Janet Napolitano, a Democrat who became President Obama's Homeland Security chief last year. Napolitano had vetoed similar bills in the past. Brewer faces a primary challenge next month; most observers expect her to sign the measure.

Some Republicans have privately complained about the bill, which Pearce has been pushing for several years, but were loath to vote against in an election year. The House was scheduled to approve it last week but the vote was delayed until Tuesday to give sponsors a chance to round up enough votes. It picked up steam after the killing late last month of a rancher on the Arizona side of the Mexican border. Footprints from the crime scene led back to Mexico.

In an impassioned debate Tuesday afternoon, both sides relied on legal and moral arguments.

"Illegal immigration brings crime, kidnapping, drugs -- drains our government services," said Rep. John Kavanagh, a Republican. "Nobody can stand on the sidelines and not take part in this battle."

Democrats were just as passionate. "This bill, whether we intend it or not, terrorizes the people we profit from," said Rep. Tom Chabin.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,4677282.story

Arizona House passes immigration bill
The Arizona House of Representatives passed a sweeping immigration bill Tuesday that would give police broad powers to arrest illegal immigrants, require immigrants to carry valid papers, and make it a misdemeanor to pick up and transport undocumented day laborers and migrants.
Senate Bill 1070 now goes back the Arizona Senate, which previously passed the measure and now must approve the House changes. The House version includes language exempting people who drive migrants to church or provide emergency services from being prosecuted.
Republicans supporting the bill say it would help combat illegal immigration and Mexican drug cartels in the state. The bill also would require police to enforce immigration laws.
“This updated version gives our local police officers the tools they need to combat illegal immigration, while protecting the civil rights of citizens and legal residents,” said Arizona Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills.
Andrew Thomas, who is running for state attorney general, also voiced his support of the bill.
"This bill would give state and local law enforcement officials important new tools for the fight against illegal immigration. I strongly support its passage and look forward to defending the law in court next year should I be elected Attorney General,” he said.
Critics — including the Arizona Interfaith Network and Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform — say the bill is anti-Hispanic and would discourage businesses from hiring Latinos. They also claim the sweeping police powers and papers requirements would turn Arizona into a police state.

Read more: Arizona House passes immigration bill - Phoenix Business Journal:
Immigration day at the Legislature
At a morning news conference, a group representing clergy and business denounced Senate Bill 1070, Sen. Russell Pearce's wide-ranging illegal immigration bill and tiptoed up to the edge of calling the Mesa senator a modern-day Hitler.
Among other things, the bill would require local law enforcement to determine a person's immigration status if the officer has "reasonable suspicion" to think the individual is in the country illegally.
It also attempts to prevent day laborers, by making it a misdemeanor both to solicit work from a roadway and to hire someone who is doing so and creates a misdemeanor offense if someone transports, or attempts to transport, an illegal immigrant when the driver knows the individual is in the country illegally.
These provisions, and many more, prompted the Arizona Interfaith Network and Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform to issue a lengthy statement detailing the problems with what they called "an indecent and dangerous bill."
They say the bill's provision would harm the state's economy by forcing households with even one person here illegally to leave, would clog the courts with numerous lawsuits and put police in a no-win position of having to choose between ignoring a law that requires them to check the immigration status of almost anyone they stop or risking charges of racial profiling.
And, said Father Glenn Jenks of the Arizona Interfaith Network, it would violate moral codes held by most world religions: "We must welcome the stranger and sojourner as if he were God himself."
Sheridan Bailey, a member of the employers group and owner of Ironco, a steel-fabrication business, said the groups are trying to convince "15 moderate House members," all Republicans, to vote against the bill. These lawmakers, whom he did not name, are wary of the bill's provisions but feel cowed by what Bailey called "mob rule and intimidation" being wielded by one or two or three members of the Legislature.
Asked who he was referring to, Bailey declined to name names. Instead, he read a psychological profile of Adolph Hitler and told those gathered at a news conference "I allow you to draw your own conclusion."
Pearce rejected such comments as "name calling" and predicted his bill will pass.
"We're prepared, and we'll prevail," he said.
The House is scheduled to begin debate on the matter at 1:30 p.m.; a formal vote is expected later this afternoon. If it passes, it will go to Gov. Jan Brewer for her consideration.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-13-2010, 06:39 PM
usa today usa today is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 438
Default

Ok , lets put this in perspective

Jan Brewer will sign this but before the ink is dry the 9th in San Fran will
put a stop to it

You all know it as well as I do

It will languish in court for years ,

The invasion continues

Nice try though
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-13-2010, 07:01 PM
Mikell's Avatar
Mikell Mikell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 77
Thumbs down

"A lot of U.S. citizens are going to be swept up in the application of this law for something as simple as having an accent and leaving their wallet at home," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, president of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona."

Read: Don't speak English and have no ID, drivers license, or insurance.

"Democrats were just as passionate. "This bill, whether we intend it or not, terrorizes the people we profit from," said Rep. Tom Chabin."
__________________
No Fate

Last edited by Mikell; 04-13-2010 at 07:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-13-2010, 07:15 PM
usa today usa today is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 438
Default

Its about time illegals felt terrorized

Its also about time we get rid of this bogus PC "profiling" idiocy

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

The vast majority of illegals in Arizona and indeed in the US are hispanic

If they are legal it should not be a problem proving it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-13-2010, 07:16 PM
usa today usa today is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 438
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikell View Post
"A lot of U.S. citizens are going to be swept up in the application of this law for something as simple as having an accent and leaving their wallet at home," said Alessandra Soler Meetze, president of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona."

Read: Don't speak English and have no ID, drivers license, or insurance.

"Democrats were just as passionate. "This bill, whether we intend it or not, terrorizes the people we profit from," said Rep. Tom Chabin."
Exactly how many people leave their ID at home?

I'd say not very many
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-13-2010, 08:05 PM
ilbegone's Avatar
ilbegone ilbegone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,068
Default

I like this bill.
__________________
Freibier gab's gestern

Hay burros en el maiz

RAP IS TO MUSIC WHAT ETCH-A-SKETCH IS TO ART

Don't drink and post.

"A nickel will get you on the subway, but garlic will get you a seat." - Old New York Yiddish Saying

"You can observe a lot just by watching." Yogi Berra

Old journeyman commenting on young apprentices - "Think about it, these are their old days"

SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

Never, ever, wear a bright colored shirt to a stand up comedy show.

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-13-2010, 10:55 PM
Commander Bunny's Avatar
Commander Bunny Commander Bunny is offline
As seen on TV!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: At the Battle-Warren
Posts: 206
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ilbegone View Post
I like this bill.

So do I.
I just wish other States would catch on to it as well.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-14-2010, 12:14 AM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commander Bunny View Post
So do I.
I just wish other States would catch on to it as well.
Well if looks like Oklahoma is doing its part to tell Mexico that that state has had enough. More and more states are starting to take this issue on, it's our govenment that's the biggest problem.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-14-2010, 05:35 AM
Rim05 Rim05 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: So CA
Posts: 1,222
Default

Quote:
But police were deeply divided on the matter, with police unions backing it but the state police chief's association opposed the bill, contending it could erode trust with immigrants who could be potential witnesses.
As far back as 1947 the hispanics would never work with the LAPD. They would rather live with their criminals than report them.
I don't know why the police keep touting that 'gaining their trust' bit. No trust has ever existed.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-14-2010, 05:39 AM
usa today usa today is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 438
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeanfromfillmore View Post
Well if looks like Oklahoma is doing its part to tell Mexico that that state has had enough. More and more states are starting to take this issue on, it's our govenment that's the biggest problem.

Yes , Terrill really gave mexico a ration

He threatened to throw everything including the kitchen sink at illegals in that state if mexico wants to take the gloves off.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved