Feds to file lawsuit over Arizona immigration law

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

it specifically states illegal or undocumented aliens in the law. so unless it says something else on a magical page that i didn't see, that's who it's intended to target.

appropriate is a matter of perspective. what you think is appropriate might not be what someone else views as appropriate. that doesn't change the fact that it's correct.

You specifically challenged DS by saying he didn't know what the lawmakers' intents were. The law they wrote literally only shows the actions. You have no greater an idea of their intent than DS does and his reading is not less valid because you disagree.

Usually you go with what the people in the population prefer, similar with racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality and any other identity oriented language. Just because the dictionary says X doesn't mean that X is a good word to use.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

You specifically challenged DS by saying he didn't know what the lawmakers' intents were. The law they wrote literally only shows the actions. You have no greater an idea of their intent than DS does and his reading is not less valid because you disagree.

Usually you go with what the people in the population prefer, similar with racial, ethnic, gender, sexuality and any other identity oriented language. Just because the dictionary says X doesn't mean that X is a good word to use.

wrong. the fact that the law specifically states illegal aliens, indicates who they're intending to go after. nowhere in the bill does it state anything about race. DS is inferring race. i'm not inferring illegal aliens.

i'm not worried about the feeling of illegal aliens.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

wrong. the fact that the law specifically states illegal aliens, indicates who they're intending to go after. nowhere in the bill does it state anything about race. DS is inferring race. i'm not inferring illegal aliens.

i'm not worried about the feeling of illegal aliens.

But you, yourself stated that the highest abounts of illegals in the country and in Az ARE Hispanics.

There is no other state right now that is taking a more aggressive stance against illegal immigrants, WHO ALSO are Hispanic, who ALSO form a large majority of that state than Arizona...I mean Texas has postured, and I believe California has also. Virginia has laws on their books...but do this, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Arizona is not just targeting Hispanic people.

have we heard about them going after illegal Asians, Greeks or Polish people?

No.

What about Cubans, Haitians or Brazialians?

No.


African Americans? ...maybe.

Manybe I have been under a rock all this time but for some reason, every time I hear or see images about the Arizona immigration issue, I see old white lawmakers going after what looks to be Latino people...so I think you have a difficult case in proving for a fact that this law covers ALL illegals and is not singling out one race in particular.

maybe it's just my POV but also after being a victim of profiling I may have a bit of bias with with this law.

BTW, you never did answer my question...I will take that as you don't have an answer.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

But you, yourself stated that the highest abounts of illegals in the country and in Az ARE Hispanics.

There is no other state right now that is taking a more aggressive stance against illegal immigrants, WHO ALSO are Hispanic, who ALSO form a large majority of that state than Arizona...I mean Texas has postured, and I believe California has also. Virginia has laws on their books...but do this, prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Arizona is not just targeting Hispanic people.

have we heard about them going after illegal Asians, Greeks or Polish people?

No.

What about Cubans, Haitians or Brazialians?

No.


African Americans? ...maybe.

Manybe I have been under a rock all this time but for some reason, every time I hear or see images about the Arizona immigration issue, I see old white lawmakers going after what looks to be Latino people...so I think you have a difficult case in proving for a fact that this law covers ALL illegals and is not singling out one race in particular.

it's targetting illegal aliens. 5/6 illegal aliens are of hispanic decent. that doesn't mean that it's targettig hispanics. unless you're insinuating that hispanics are all illegal.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

unless you're insinuating that hispanics are all illegal.

Nope...that's what Arizona is doing.

Originally Posted by starang21

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal...gal_immigrants

In other words, YOU PERSONALLY don't have an answer...thanks.

You know you are mad when you try to make someone go to wikipedia....

[starang21]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Nope...that's what Arizona is doing.



In other words, YOU PERSONALLY don't have an answer...thanks.

You know you are mad when you try to make someone go to wikipedia....

no, that's what you're doing. don't let your bias cloud your judgement.

if you clicked the link, then you'd realize that that site cites the studies it gets it's numbers from. but strictly for the unmotivated and lazy:


http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...LL_PE_2005.pdf

windmilling shows how little you actually know.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

no, that's what you're doing. don't let your bias cloud your judgement.

if you clicked the link, then you'd realize that that site cites the studies it gets it's numbers from. but strictly for the unmotivated and lazy:


http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...LL_PE_2005.pdf

windmilling shows how little you actually know.

So stop being unmovitivated and lazy and answer, where do YOU think they got the estimates from...anyone can click a website. I asked YOU to answer the question.

I can go to Pew, I can go to wikipedia, hell I can call my s/o (who works for DHS)on the phone and ask HER to pull stats....I didn't.

I asked YOU for your opinion.

If you are citing websites, at least tell me why you used them...or is that too hard?

oh yeah...BTW it's 'descent'.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

wrong. the fact that the law specifically states illegal aliens, indicates who they're intending to go after. nowhere in the bill does it state anything about race. DS is inferring race. i'm not inferring illegal aliens.

i'm not worried about the feeling of illegal aliens.

So, you don't know what their intent was, you're just assuming that it was nothing more than what was written down.

And that's yet another form of dehumanization.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

So, you don't know what their intent was, you're just assuming that it was nothing more than what was written down.

And that's yet another form of dehumanization.

that's all you can go off of. unless you have that magic page that didnt make it to the final bill. or someone told you differently.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

that's all you can go off of. unless you have a magic page that didnt make it to the fnal bill.

No, it's not. You're confusing actions and words with intent.

You also haven't even begun to examine the effects.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

No, it's not. You're confusing actions and words with intent.

You also haven't even begun to examine the effects.

well, do you have any additional information as to their intent? or is all we can work with is the bill they wrote?

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by starang21

well, do you have any additional information as to their intent? or is all we can work with is the bill they wrote?

Do you have any information that disproves the intent that we presently see?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by starang21

well, do you have any additional information as to their intent? or is all we can work with is the bill they wrote?

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/20...-kobach-email/

Wonk Room recently obtained an email written by Kris Kobach, a lawyer at the Immigration Reform Law Institute — the group which credits itself with writing the bill — to Arizona state Sen. Russell Pierce (R), urging him to include language that will allow police to use city ordinance violations such as “cars on blocks in the yard” as an excuse to “initiate queries” in light of the “lawful contact” deletion:

To begin with, Kobach’s correspondence affirms that though the bill was proposed and passed in Arizona, the shots are being called by a small group of lawyers whose office is based in Washington, DC. It also indicates that after vigorously defending his bill and its “lawful contact provision” in the New York Times, Kobach may have had second thoughts about the constitutionality of the bill he prides himself with writing.

In an email to Wonk Room, David Leopold -- president-elect of the American Immigration Lawyers Association -- wrote:

Kobach’s email to Pearce is chilling. Knowing full well that the phrase “lawful contact” must go (a flip flop from the position he took yesterday in the New York Times) he recommends tweaking the law in a manner that would appear to allow profiling. Why else would he be interested in using property or rental codes to ferret out undocumented people? Is he aware of some credible study that shows unauthorized aliens from say Ireland or Canada, or some other country tend to put their cars on blocks and/or overcrowd apartments? Kris Kobach and Senator Pearce owe Arizonans and the nation an immediate explanation. Note: it appears the email was written by Kobach on Wednesday evening before his op-ed ran in the New York Times the next morning. The op-ed argued that the Arizona law as written was legal. If he was working on changing it why then did he let the New York Times piece run?

This bill was also followed up by a bill banning ethnic studies and the push for a law that would challenge the 14th amendment.

ETA: As well as a "birther" sponsored bill that would require all candidates to prove citizenship.