Arizona governor signs immigration bill
 

Phoenix, Arizona (CNN) -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill Friday that requires police in her state to determine whether a person is in the United States legally, which critics say will foster racial profiling but supporters say will crack down on illegal immigration.

The bill requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there is reason to suspect that they're in the United States illegally. It also targets those who hire illegal immigrant day laborers or knowingly transport them.

The Republican governor also issued an executive order that requires additional training for local officers on how to implement the law without engaging in racial profiling or discrimination.

"This training will include what does and does not constitute reasonable suspicion that a person is not legally present in the United States," Brewer said after signing the bill.

"Racial profiling is illegal. It is illegal in America, and it's certainly illegal in Arizona," Brewer said.

The rules, to be established in by the Arizona Peace Officers Standards and Training Board, are due back to her in May. The law goes into effect 90 days after the close of the legislative session, which has not been determined.

Previously, officers could check someone's immigration status only if that person was suspected in another crime.

Brewer's executive order was in response to critics who argue that the new law will lead to racial profiling, saying that most police officers don't have enough training to look past race while investigating a person's legal status.

"As committed as I am to protecting our state from crime associated with illegal immigration, I am equally committed to holding law enforcement accountable should this stature ever be misused to violate an individual's rights," Brewer said.

She added that the law would probably be challenged in courts and that there are those outside Arizona who have an interest in seeing the state fail with the new measure.

"We cannot give them that chance. We must use this new tool wisely and fight for our safety with the honor Arizona deserves."

The bill is considered to be among the toughest immigration measures in the nation. Supporters say the measure is needed to fill a void left by the federal government's failure to enforce its immigration laws.


link

GC Legal eagles...will this stand up in the Supreme Court?

I guess these guys haven't heard of the supremacy clause.

I haven't so tell me about it, Kevin.

I am amazed about this law. As much as they might think illegal immigrants are a problem, do they really think it's okay to go up to anyone who "looks" like an illegal and require them to prove their not? I just foresee a lot of discrimination against American citizens who happen to be of latin descent. I think immigration is an important issue, but you can't impact a group of law-abiding American citizens unfairly to attack the problem.

Just don't be caught DWH ...hehehe

This is why discrimination is based on outcome and not intent. The intent of this new law is more along the lines of buffering some of the effects of illegal immigration that has hit some states harder than others.

The outcome will definitely be racial and ethnic profiling and an uneasiness when anyone who looks like "one of them" is seen.

Meanwhile, Black folks are like "how you like dem apples," just like Blacks asked East Indians after Sept. 11.

Meanwhile2, this is when being a Black Hispanic and a white Hispanic really kicks ass because your ethnic identity is overshadowed by your racial identity.

considering that this law was written by lawyers, i'm willing to bet they have.

If you've been following the antics of a certain Harvard grad District Attorney in Maricopa County, you'd believe as I do, that though they have heard about things like the Supremacy Clause, they don't think those things apply to them.

We had a similar law in Oklahoma, although admittedly weaker than Arizona's law. It was struck down by the 10th Circuit on preemption grounds holding that federal law both expressly and impliedly preempted the Oklahoma laws.

State laws are expressly preempted by federal law when either Congress has already enacted a statutory scheme intended to occupy the field or when it becomes a physical impossibility to comply with both the federal and state laws. When it comes to immigration, there is a statutory scheme on the books and at least one federal agency whose sole purpose is to fight illegal immigration. If there's no argument for an intent to occupy the field here, I don't think there's one anywhere.

Further, a law can be impliedly preempted. One way for that to happen is if the new law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full objectives of Congress.

Congress has chosen, through inaction mostly, to have a semi-porous border with our Southern neighbor. It is federal policy to encourage immigration. The Arizona law would seem to interfere with the objectives of Congress, giving state officials unfettered power to over-enforce Congress' statutory scheme, bringing about an end result which few would claim was what Congress had in mind when enacting the current statutory scheme.

For the above reasons, just about all of Oklahoma's laws, which at the time (Google Oklahoma and HB1804 from 2007) were the strongest in the country were held unconstitutional on preemption grounds. The only part which was allowed to stand was a voluntary ID-check thingamajig for employers where employers were given some sort of incentive to check the immigration status of new employees through a federal database called EVerify.

I don't actually know anyone who uses that system though.

This.Makes.Me.Crazy.

I live 60 miles from the border. Hundreds of people die, every year, crossing the desert, year around. The Sonoran Desert is a brutal, unforgiving terrain.

The passage of this horrific law is not going to accomplish anything positive. It's certainly not going to stem the flow of border crossers. It's posturing, in my opinion, and it panders to a minority who, sadly, seem to control much of what happens in this state. I am ashamed of our Governor and Legislature. I am grateful that this is an election year and that we will (I hope) have someone else in Jan Brewer's office come next January.

I'll be there to help:D

yeah !! you're coming to Arizona !! .. now we just have to have a
mini-gc meet ... maybe ASUADPi as well as AZTheta, you, and me

Hey if you guys are in Tempe/Mesa area in Sept....I would love to gather for a lunch or something....ASUADPi and I did that a few years ago

I'll be there, ms_gwyn! My new job is in Mesa, and I'll be moving to central Phoenix.

I am! Mini-GC convention Arizona 2010. What should the theme be?

This thread should be titled "Arizona governor signs racial profiling bill".:rolleyes:

"Papers, please"....remind you of a certain period in history?? I am appalled!!!!

I keep forgetting the quote feature is my best friend. Yep, I agree with this. It's sad.

IDK about the "kick ass" part, but I was told this when I complained about the bill. "What are you complaining about, it's not like they are gonna stop you!" :rolleyes:

I understand what the governor was trying to accomplish with this bill, but the outcome (like DrPhil said) will just be wrong.

I like how people are saying this WON'T turn into racial profiling because illegal Hispanics aren't the only "illegals"--you got people from the Asian countries, as well as European ones. Yeah, like the cops will really stop a white man and say "let me see your papers, I think you might be here illegally." :rolleyes:

If the Federal Government were doing it's job and protecting our borders AZ wouldn't have to do anything and the borders would be secure.

I don't have a problem if I am stopped. I happen to have dark skin. (Native American on my Father's side). Big F-ing deal! The illegal aliens should be sent back across the border and come in the proper way.

^^^^ Go away, troll.

I'm not sure where everyone in this thread is from but there are already parts of the country that do random stops. Usually it is in close proximity to the border. If I'm driving around in the valley I know there is a good chance I'm getting stopped at a border patrol checkpoint.

A lot of times, people think I'm Hispanic because of my darker olive tone. I guess I get it from my mom's southern Greek side of the family and my dad is Italian, so I guess that explains my skin tone. I agree with keeping the "illegal aliens" on their side of the border unless they're gonna come over the proper way, but I am totally against stopping someone because they "LOOK" a certain way. That's SO wrong. Oh, and I would have a major problem if I was stopped, because of the way I "look".

Were you there when I had my first job at 16? I don't even have anything to say to this insanely stupid comment. You can't fight ignorance and bigotry when it's in-breed.

You obviously didn't get my historical reference. Maybe they should go house to house and get rid of all of the ignorant bigots in this country.

Oh, and bye-bye. You'll be banned soon.

THIS
and they can start with Max.

Which is just one of the many reasons we should all ignore him instead of giving him the attention he so desperately craves.

I believe you hit the spot with this one. Out of all the southern states, Arizona has the most severe problems with illegal immigration and crimes associated with it. I'm not saying that there isn't going to be problems enforcing it, but I believe that this bill was passed because lawmakers felt that they had to take matters into their own hand as opposed to waiting for the Federal Gov to do something about it.

A lot of cities have identified themselves as "sanctuary" cities where police and non immigration related Gov agencies are prohibited from asking an individual any questions about citizenship or immigration status. With this law being passed it allows local police to run immigration checks on anyone who gives probable cause.

I think we should sit back and see how this ends up being enforced. I don't believe that cops are going to start pulling over hispanics just to see if they are here illegally, I think they will do immigration checks in conjunction with criminal history checks when they already have a subject for DWI or assault or whatever infraction/misdemeanor.

This bill is a hot topic in this area but I think people need to simmer down and see how AZ police plan to enforce it. A local radio station was saying that if you are US citizen hispanic/latino and don't have your birth certificate on you when pulled over in AZ that you'll be deported. SO NOT TRUE. I think that there are a lot of scare tactics being used to attack this bill, sort of like the death panels, health care rationing rumors that were going on last year in regards to health care reform.

Little tit for tat? The problem is, they specifically said that you don't have to be suspected of any crime to be checked.

Oh, being here illegally ISN'T a crime?

I know. I live in a sanctuary city.

This is exactly why I made my post about border patrol checkpoints. Everyone thinks that once you make it through the border crossing you're good to go but the federal government operates mobile border patrol checkpoints. I've been stopped and asked to identity my country of origin numerous times. After I provide ID I'm sent on my way. No crime was committed and I was not suspected of any crime other than illegal immigration. I don't see the difference between what the border patrol does and what the AZ police will now start doing.

Touche'. Short, succinct and to the point. Score.

Not necessarily. The problem will come with stating articulable suspicion that the person being detained has committed a crime, if all the police can say is "well, he looked like he might be from Mexico."

Where does border patrol operate? Do they patrol every street and do illegal immigrant check points throughout the state?

And being hispanic isn't a crime. Being a hispanic doesn't make you automatically an illegal immigrant. How can you tell an illegal immigrant from a legal US citizen or a legal immigrant without profiling?

As for Kevlar...it is one thing to be checked near a border, it is completely another to be stopped walking down the street in towns far from a border.

Yeah, I think the points about discrimination and racial/ethnic profiling went way over Ghostwriter's and PiKA2001's heads:

We can't predict the future but we can look at what has happened more often than not when such laws and practices exist. If the law doesn't outline the do's and don'ts of it while acknowledging how it can be mishandled (I'm not saying laws necessarily do this), that gives the power and discretion to law enforcement--sounds familiar.

the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens are of hispanic descent. 10 million of the 12 million illegals are hispanic. are the hispanic cops going to be practicing racial profiling?

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

i couldn't figure out explicitly how this law is going to implemented. but i figure that something to the affect that the everify thing that you mentioned would be a good idea.

and from what i'm gathering from your post, the state has no right to fight illegal immigration because there's a federal agency already existing to do so?

so you're saying that it's congress's explicit policy to encourage immigration or it's interpreted policy through inaction?

Yes.

Just like Black police officers engaged in racial profiling and DWB, even if they engaged in it reluctantly. It was partly a means of earning their stripes and, for some, it was a means of distinguishing themselves as different than "dem n------s."

Racial profiling is a practice like institutional discrimination. You don't have to be white (or not a member the targeted group) to engage in such discriminatory practices.

Oh yeah and this was used as a justification for racial profiling targeting Blacks.

Although whites commit most of the crimes in America, Blacks are disproportionately represented in crime. Therefore, law enforcement and many citizens felt that reducing crime (particularly the "street crimes" that people feared the most) could be accomplished if they targeted certain areas of the city and certain groups of people. Many people felt that high crime rates committed by such an underrepresented group was indicative of criminal predisposition and therefore warranted such tactics. It's also easier to target a minority group than target a majority group. Woohoo!!!!