Thursday, April 29, 2010
And quite reasonably...and in the New York Times no less (who let this guy in?): Why Arizona Drew a Line. In this snip, he addresses the major criticisms of the law, but read the entire thing:
... It is unfair to demand that aliens carry their documents with them. It is true that the Arizona law makes it a misdemeanor for an alien to fail to carry certain documents. "Now, suddenly, if you don't have your papers ... you're going to be harassed," the president said. "That's not the right way to go." But since 1940, it has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep such registration documents with them. The Arizona law simply adds a state penalty to what was already a federal crime. Moreover, as anyone who has traveled abroad knows, other nations have similar documentation requirements.
"Reasonable suspicion" is a meaningless term that will permit police misconduct. Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn't invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the "totality of circumstances" that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.
For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.
The law will allow police to engage in racial profiling. Actually, Section 2 provides that a law enforcement official "may not solely consider race, color or national origin" in making any stops or determining immigration status. In addition, all normal Fourth Amendment protections against profiling will continue to apply. In fact, the Arizona law actually reduces the likelihood of race-based harassment by compelling police officers to contact the federal government as soon as is practicable when they suspect a person is an illegal alien, as opposed to letting them make arrests on their own assessment.
It is unfair to demand that people carry a driver's license. Arizona's law does not require anyone, alien or otherwise, to carry a driver's license. Rather, it gives any alien with a license a free pass if his immigration status is in doubt. Because Arizona allows only lawful residents to obtain licenses, an officer must presume that someone who produces one is legally in the country...
...In sum, the Arizona law hardly creates a police state. It takes a measured, reasonable step to give Arizona police officers another tool when they come into contact with illegal aliens during their normal law enforcement duties...
Also, good post at Legal Insurrection: Just Say It - "All Immigration Laws Are Racist"
What we have, at least in part, is the "disparity of effect" phenomenon. You know, related to the "World to End Tomorrow - Women and Minorities Hardest Hit"-thing. Since everyone knows the main concern, because of their numbers, is illegal immigrants from south of the border, it therefore follows that "brown" people will be disproportionately affected, even if not explicitly stated or even intended. I believe this has come to be due to the legal system, as it provides a quantifiable metric for something that is generally unquantifiable -- racist intent. I have never found the argument particularly persuasive, and think it is a generally a dangerous and destructive standard of measure. I say "particularly persuasive," since I hold out the possibility that such a measure may be helpful or meaningful, it's just that I can't think of one at the moment.
Border state taxpayers would never suspect where their hard-earned dollars were going or any other taxpaying American? It’s been to house thousands of illegal aliens in prison, to pay their health care, school their children and so many other hidden programs. But you-know-what finally hit the fan? It was the upsurge of heinous criminal activity in Phoenix and surrounding towns. It has overwhelmed the city police, who unable to control the influx of criminals from across the border? The Governor and the Phoenix assembly had to enact laws to fight back. They were at the end of their desperate tether and had to do something--and do something immediately? The Liberal activist judges has trashed parts of the US constitution and interpreting laws from the bench enacted "Politically Correctness" which tied the hands of Arizona police enforcements.
They wanted laws that protected the people from the growing activity of criminals, so that the police needed a law to questioning who was in the country legally and who was not? Voters of Arizona had enough of their wages being garnished to support the illegal alien occupancy and now changed the law under the governing hand of Jan Brewer. As long as anybody can remember the federal government has ignored any enforcement on the border. For a very limited time Federal troops patrolled the areas of illegal alien smuggling, but Washington had incapacitated them so they didn't have the powers of arrest. They were only there as observers and in the capacity of laying roads and construction of the fence. Our government has failed to build the double border fence as initially perceived by draftee Rep. Duncan Hunter.
The Bush administration had implemented new tools such as E-Verify. But Pro-illegal immigrant Senators as Harry Reid, majority house speaker Pelosi have tried to sacrifice enforcement tools as E-Verify and 287 G, police questioning program in different counties. Sen. Schumer introduced the Biometric card, likely as distraction, to starve the E-Verify application from the public and business attention? Currently Napolitano has cut budgets for the border patrol, ICE and other sections of the SAVE ACT. Then --as for Sen. John McCain? How expeditiously he has changed his mind about the invasion. First he was all for AMNESTY. Now he's pushing for another anti-illegal immigrant plan. We just can't trust any of them? BUT McCain IS CORRECT ON ONE POINT; WE NEED TO MILITARIZE THE BORDER--ARMED AND READY. The border region has become a bloody battlefield, with the potential of an all-out war between few, isolated Sheriffs and deputies with well-armed gunman with automatic weapons and grenades.
THE QUESTION IS TO ASK WHY HASN'T THE NATIONAL GUARD NOT PICKETING THE DANGEROUS BORDER ALREADY? DO THEY HAVE SOME SECRET AGREEMENT WITH THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT OVER THE BORDER LINE TO ADMIT CHEAP LABOR? Already over a trillion dollars has been appropriated to grease the wheels of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with no end in sight. WHY IS THE BORDER FENCE NOT CONSTRUCTED AS ORIGINALLY PLANNED? WHY HASN”T OUR GOVERNMENT APPROVED ENOUGH MONEY TO CONSTRUCT THE ORIGINAL FENCE? The first killing was Robert Kurtz, the humanitarian rancher, with a few less publicized deaths of Border Patrol Agents and police officers. Land owners live in fear of the next encounter while they are away from their barricaded homes. This danger may arise as illegal criminals become more active in the area.
The left wing press has downplayed the danger in the Border States. Even a pro-amnesty governor as Bill Richardson, who issued drivers licenses to illegal immigrants has demanded the military on his border territory, which says something of the desperate plight. Arizona Being the first state just across the open border countless numbers of impoverished people have slipped past our thin undermanned line of Border patrol agents. In the last twenty years millions of foreigners circumvented our laws, to become a financial burden on every state in the union. This situation is not getting any better, but far worse as Democratic-Liberal influenced legislators have been offering even more welfare programs in Liberal run assemblies. We already have the 1986 immigration laws on the books and don’t need rescinding. If it had been enforced in the first place, we wouldn't have this increasing population of illegal immigrants.
The border remains wide-open in many places, as criminals are also appearing in increasing numbers in every town. Quietly screened by the government from view, foreign insurgents, who are being assisted by drug cartels and gang members are already here. The police who are in short supply along the border region, believe that drug dealers were responsible for the death of Robert Kruntz on his cattle ranch. Then there is the case of Robert Rosas, a US Border Agent gunned down on this side of the border, near San Diego by illegal immigrants in July 2009. My guess the press was asked to keep this murder a secret, because of the implications of people living in the border region?
All those politicians implicated in keeping the border unsealed or involved in the pro-amnesty movement must be removed during primaries or any upcoming election. Learn more about AMNESTY, overpopulation growth, your money paying to support foreign nationals at NumbersUSA. Tell your government, we don't need another financially devastating amnesty at 202-224-3121 Remember taxpayers money spent on illegal immigrants annually, would pay for our foreign wars.
As a legal immigrant, who came to this wonderful country in 1961 at the ripe old age of 19, I would like to throw in my two cents.
First of all I will never regret taking the opportunity, and can understand the desire of others to come to this country, BUT.........
As legal immigrants we pay taxes and contribute to the community. Illegals cost the nation...
There are many companies who knowingly hire illegals using the excuse "We cannot find Americans to do the jobs".
I have suggestions:
1. Unemployed people should be allowed 6 months to search for jobs, after which time they should be offered jobs through the unemployment service with due consideration for their qualifications, they should be allowed to refuse 2 jobs, but must accept the third or lose benefits. If the pay is less than they had been making on unemploywment the unemployment office would pay them the difference. This would save the state money, and reduce the number of jobs available to illegals.
2. Re-instate the Draft. I know this would not go over well, but please hear me out. When I came to this country there was a draft and thousands of young men who might never hjave left there home countiers, let alon states where taken to all parts of the country, and the world, they got to see first hand how others lived and many when they came back to this country kissed the ground.......they appreciated what this country has to offer, something that does not seem to exist any longer.
The troops would be assigned for a period of at least two years, preferrably three, as active duty personnel, followed by two years in the National Guard, full time, not in their home area, then three years reserve.
By increasing the size of the military we would be taking people off welfare and unemployment. We should use the National Guard for just that......Guarding the nation.....these troops would be assigned to guard our borders and keep the illegals out, as well as assist Customs with inspections of incoming freight and personnel.
I was talking to a person recently who knew of a Mexican who was deported from Mississippi, and six months later was back in the same area, I know that this is quite common.
Illegals are costing us money, they do not pay taxes, contribute to our Social Security, and are
a drain on our public services. We should enforce our laws, deport the illegals and their families....I am sorry, but those born here to illegals woould have never been here in the first place.
Employers who do not require proof ( I had to show my green card), should be severely punished, to the point where it would make them think very hard before they hired people.
If our police are not allowed to stop people who appear to be aliens we are just encouraging the illegals. This is a wonderful country and I can understand people wanting to get in, but if we do not implement our laws we will be over run. Look at England, people from countries that were within the Commonwealth were allowed to immigrate with no restrictions, and it created nothing but problems.
Thanks for this opportunity to voice my feelings.
Guy
The disparate effect laws are crap. They have been used to dumb down standards...part of the overall degradation of Western Civilization.
The Poles and Czechs are bellyaching about US immigration laws too, and they no doubt would be here in larger numbers if they lived closer. You can see Brits complaining about Polish and Easter European immigration via European Union.
However dont expect the racism scoundrels to stop playing there ugly divisive game, that weakens the US and other European countries and paralyzes them from acting effectively in their citizens best interests.
If you are going to use disparate impact, then most of criminal laws are also racist....any law really, is likely to produce a disparate impact on some group or other.