Hi all,

Here is a story from the Arizona republic that talks about the ruling that U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton Arizona’s new immigration reform law that is suppose to take affect tomorrow.  The following provisions have been struck down by her honor Susan Bolton:

•  The portion of the law that requires an officer make a reasonable attempt to determine the immigration status of a person stopped, detained or arrested if there’s reasonable suspicion they’re in the country illegally.

•  The portion that creates a crime of failure to apply for or carry “alien-registration papers.”

•  The portion that allows for a warrantless arrest of a person where there is probable cause to believe they have committed a public offense that makes them removable from the United States.

• The portion that makes it a crime for illegal immigrants to solicit, apply for or perform work. There are three parts to that part of the law. Two of them will go into effect, one of them will not.

I feel that her honor made the correct decision on the first provision regarding what constitutes as a reasonable determination.  Reason being (as I mentioned in a previous blog post).  The way I see this, I feel the question is what do you constitute as reasonable in determining a person’s legal status?  Do you consider the person’s skin color?  Because Hispanic people can be white in color or naturally tan/brown.  Just because they commit a crime?  Hispanics, whites, legal citizens and illegal immigrants all commit crimes and are arrested for them as well.  What if a Hispanic person is legal? How can they “prove” their citizenship when they already legal and your asking for a green card?  Most people do not carry their birth certificates around with them and I’m sure that illegals carry some form of a photo ID.  If legal Hispanic cannot provide proof of their legal status, are you going to detain and arrest them until they do or their identities are confirm?  Morally and ethically no, but this provision would open the gate for those who are here legally to be subject to discrimination of some form.

The others I feel she made the wrong decision.  That would be regarding warrantless searches, being a crime not carrying a green card, and making it a crime to solicit, apply for or perform work.  Regarding the warrentless searches, it falls under the jurisdiction of the 4th amendment of the US constitution which applies to any and all legal citizens of the United States, being illegal, you are not protected.  Such rights that we all have being legal does not apply to any of those who are here illegally with or without US identification like a state ID or driver’s license.   Regarding to the provision on having a green card, let me give you a parallel, if I were to visit another country or was a citizen of another country, then I would expected to have a passport or a green card equivalent to show that I am visiting and/or a citizen, so why not enforce that here.  It is already a federal so for a state to have an equivalent law, that is fine.  And finally with the last provision, if you are here illegally, you should not be able to work.  I understand that they may be hear to have a better life but doing it illegally is not the way in my opinion.

Steve

http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/07/28/20100728arizona-immigration-law-court-ruling-brk28-ON.html

Advertisements