I absolutely support the strict enforcement of our borders. There is zero racism or nativism behind this sentiment. I love and support the legal immigration of all kinds of people. Immigrants have built this country and continue to build this country. For me, it's a security issue. The United States has a lot of enemies. We also have a huge crime problem. Spotty enforcement of immigration law and poor control of the borders increases the risk posed by both of these problems.
I have mixed feelings about the Arizona law. At it's core, I support the concept of the law. The fact that they thought to eliminate the possibility of "sanctuary" areas is good too. My single biggest concern is the fact that since it's only one state, it creates a situation of unequal enforcement. Since the control of our borders is supposed to be a Federal concern, immigration enforcement should also be a Federal concern.
The rampant spewing of reactionary fear and threats of boycotts is due to the media's misinformation. No, the Arizona police can't just stop you for no reason. They can't just go, "let's stop all the brown people." You have to be stopped for a reason other than "looking illegal." In other words, you have to be doing something wrong already.
For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision 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.
The one part of the law most likely to be struck down is the section on day worker solicitation. The Supreme Court has already addressed that issue and it had been killed on a Freedom of Speech concern. So long as Arizona enforces this fairly and doesn't trump up charges against specific ethnic groups, most of the law should stand in court.
From Helge Moulding:
ReplyDeleteI suspect all of SB 1070 will be struck down, but I'm no lawyer. I also don't agree with boycotting the state, for the same reason that I thought boycotting Utah over LDS support of anti-gay legislation was a bad idea.
I also believe that AZ's lege and gov acted not so much to do something useful as to send a message to their constituents. They ... See Moreall know full well this law "SHALL. NOT. PASS!" constitutional muster. (Although SCOTUS may surprise me here, as it did over Citizens United.)
I only wish that Congress had the huevos to step up to the ball and pass reasonable immigration reform. That would have made SB 1070 unnecessary.
My Reply:
ReplyDeleteSo long as American business depends on illegal labor, the American government will not step up to the plate.
From Helge Moulding:
ReplyDeleteI'm not convinced of that. I think that the people currently in this country without appropriate documentation are being exploited by relying on their inability find work better work due to their lack of education, inability to speak English sufficiently well, and looking like a Mexican. That won't change with immigration reform.
In other words, ... See Morebusinesses would actually welcome a guest worker program, at least if it isn't accompanied by iron-clad anti-discrimination laws.
Anti-discrimination laws are pretty unlikely. So many people seem to believe that affirmative action is no longer necessary (even if they might admit it ever was).
I should add that I'm not suggesting all businesses are cynical in their hiring. Just that those that are cynical would love a guest worker program.
From Ami Nosh:
ReplyDeleteMy blog is still in the works, but I think it is the biggest pain in the butt law ever passed, and I think that people's passion for or against the annexation of illegal immigrants has clouded people's judgment in the passage of 1070.
All immigrants are required to carry documentation. Umm . . . K. I can see that. Does that include legal ... See Morecitizens, like my dad, who's been here for 30+ years? Is he considered an immigrant or a citizen? OK, I guess I can live with that anyway.
But then the clause that says they can question anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant and detain them if they don't have proof?
Illegal immigrants look like . . . well . . . ME! Based on comments I've gotten from strangers, my looks alone make me look a bit Mexican and illegal. And not being an immigrant, I don't have any documentation of being here legally. Does my DL count? Do I need to carry around a birth certificate? And if we've learned anything from President Obama, quite a few people out there will doubt even your birth certificate if they think your credentials are suspicious.
I don't think the law is racist, necessarily, but I DO think it's a pain in the butt for minorities. I will support it thoroughly, provided we have checkpoints where EVERY citizen needs to show proof of citizenship, regardless of age, race, or foreign accent, and anyone who doesn't have it needs to be questioned and detained.
I've already been-there-done-that after 9-11-01; I got pulled off of every flight and been searched. Plenty of long stories there. I really don't want to get pulled over every day on the way to work to prove that I'm here legally.
Suffice it to say I won't be touristing in Arizona for a while. No, not to boycott them, but because I'm too lazy (and, frankly, forgetful) to carry proof of citizenship, and would rather vacation somewhere that I won't be arrested for being brown without a green card.
My Reply:
ReplyDelete@Ami I totally feel you on the 9-11 thing. Somehow I always got "randomly" picked for search. I suspect that it was because I'm olive complected and wear a, non-baseball hat, head covering all the time.
You have to be doing something else wrong to be stopped and asked for proof of legal status. If they stop and harass you, even though you aren't violating the law in some other way... they are in violation of their own law. When that happens, the officer in question should get the shit sued out of him/her.