Amazon.com Widgets
I thought these things might be clues.
user-pic

Arizona Law Leading to Racial Profiling?

Vote 0 Votes

This new Arizona law (SB 1070), of which I'm sure many of you've heard of on the news, would require local police to enforce federal-immigration laws. Here is the text of the bill. Do you feel this new law unfairly and/or unlawfully employs racial profiling (even if the detention is made through some other pretext)? Is there a way in which racial profiling could be legally exculpated in certain contexts and situations? Even if it can be, do you think it's acceptable to do so in some or all contexts and situations?

Excerpt:

    "A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution." [bold, mine]



Some have suggested that because "latino" is not a race per the U.S. 2010 Census, that it cannot possibly be racial profiling to stop someone on racial grounds, but as we see above it says the consideration can be on "race, color or national origin." Can it still be 'racial profiling' taking the other two elements into account or only the 'race' portion?

Thoughts?

53 Replies

  • Seems kinda silly to pass a law saying the police should question people who they have reason to believe are breaking the law. What's next? Are they gonna pass a law saying teachers should teach students? Mailmen (or women) should deliver mail? Firemen (and women) should fight fires? It's a mixed up, fumbled up, shook up world and so is Lola.

    Sorry, the MP3 player is on random this morning - haven't heard that one in a while.

  • Where do you live Erick?

  • This from your link to the newly passed law you posted above:

    A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:

    1. A valid Arizona driver license.

    2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.

    3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.

    4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification.

    • Papers, Herr jones?

    • Right, and for an officer to be able to perform a detention of someone they need to cross the standard of 'reasonable suspicion'.

      Here's an excerpt from the law:

      B. 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 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

      [bold, mine]

      What, praytell, constitutes 'reasonable suspicion' for someone to be an alien? The fact that they're brown and speak Spanish? Or as The Daily Show clip put it that they're gardening or burping white people's babies?

  • Yeah, you win. Anarchy Rocks!

  • I could post these all day and never convince you Red. Can you find similar stories about illegal Canadians invading Minnesota?

    I don't know Erick well enough to know if his loyalty to the Democrat Party blinds him to reason. Maybe one of you could propose a better solution to Arizona's problems (other than giving Arizona back to Mexico). Clearly the feds have no intention of stopping illegal immigration.

    • ehh, you can post stories of marijuana drug deals gone wrong all day and It won't convince me it shouldn't be legal. I thought you were a libretarian or some such nonesense?

      I think there should be hard core enforcement on business that knowingly employ the undocumented. Fine them off the face of the earth.

      Enforcing the average illegal is like arresting every potsmoker. Big Brother bull.

      • You think killing cops is just a drug deal gone wrong? Raping children? - You're on crack yourself aren't you!?!?

        • An analogy?

          Yeah, I think, drug dealing leading to murder is in some way to analogous to illegal immigration leading to a violent crime.

          Particularly in respect to their legality, making the problem worse rather than better.

    • Why should it be illegal to move from one country to another? Why shouldn't the people that move from one country to another be able to be a part of the governance of their new homes?

      • Syngas sorry but your links are pure bullshit. The fact that they're "illegals" didn't make them commit those crimes anymore than the fact that being legal (or white) didn't make the bankers commit all that fraud. And by the way, who has caused more damage?

        And about the economic arguments: most "illegals" do pay taxes just like anyone else. Many are on the payroll with fake SSN, they get their taxes withheld, and even pay Social Security that they'll never get. Many of them even fully comply by doing their taxes with an ITIN. This is what I NEVER see mentioned when people say they're such an economic "burden".

        Also what I don't see mentioned is all those real freeloaders who abuse unemployment and disability.

        And a solution: legalize all, so even the ones who are too afraid to take a payroll job can start paying taxes and contributing as well. (And it's not like legal citizens don't seek cash-paying jobs either.)

      • It's not illegal to move from one country to another. It's illegal to do it without permission.

  • Loyalty to the Democratic Party? Huh?

    I have not, in any way, said that the government shouldn't be in the business of enforcing immigration laws provided that they do so in a legal and ethical way. But you seem to care more about the ends and little for the means. Would it be okay to circumvent "unreasonable searches and seizures" if it lead to an efficient way of cracking down on crime?

    My point was that if racial profiling is illegal then the state would also be guilty of criminal activity. If the principle you're trying to uphold is enforcement of the law, wouldn't it be a double standard to expect immigrants to abide by them but not the government?

  • So you don't have an answer for Arizona's problem?

  • Is it really democratic Erick? Your party seems anti-democratic to me.

    • Why do you keep assuming my party is the Democratic party? Because the position I'm taking with this issue here isn't conservative enough for you? Rather than address the issue head-on you're trying to find any way to smear me or the position I'm taking. If you disagree with it then please provide a good refutation other than stating the obvious (i.e. that we have an illegal immigration problem). We also have a problem in other areas in crime. Should we abandon our rights against "unreasonable searches and seizures" in order to address exigent issues on those fronts as well? And if you tell me that it's unlawful and unprincipled to do so, I'll just ask you, "So you don't have an answer for how to better crack down on said crime?"

    • anti-democratic

      riiiiiiight. What with all their gettign of votes and supporting of people having votes and believing 51% is a majority nonsense.

      Not to mention their big brother review of calls without a warrant and close relationship with the military.

  • not that it matters

    I'm sure you're in support of it now....or maybe you should ask The Young Turks before you decide.

    • Well of course because I'm a reasonable and thoughtful person, not one who decides things on emotionality like your friends at FOX or your conservative excuse me unbiased friends at Rasmussen.

      I just don't know why this change had to go be implemented after much kicking and screaming. We should always work to enforce the law the right way, unless you want to take a page out of Mexico and how it handles its business in matters of the law.

  • The changes in the law didn't change anything but your ability to understand it Erick.

  • Immigration was broke with NAFTA. You can't have free movement of corporate capital with out having free movement of human capital.

    • An often overlooked but extremely important fact.

      Going after illegal immigrants without systemic change to our trade policies, the war on drugs and low-cost-at-all-cost consumer culture is like treating the symptoms and not the disease.

  • Hey Guys,

    You're not gonna believe this! Check out California Penal Code 834b

    You'll have to scroll a bit, but WOW - that sounds familiar!

    • THere are many aspects of the Arizon law (which you have pointed out) that make sense.

      Here are the ones that are plain dumb:

      • Only an Arizona Driver's License is sufficient - not an out-of-state license. So, If I'm driving to Scottsdale, I need a passport or VISA in my own country. That is dumb.

      • Employers who knowingly employ undocumented workers do not face criminal charges. They can lose their business license, but if it's such a horrible crime, then why not a legal punishment?

      • It makes it a state crime of “trespassing” if a “person is present on any public or private land” in Arizona and is without documentation proving citizenship or residency. Even if you're a citizen. Again, really dumb.

      • My favorite: It allows residents to sue cities if they believe the law is not being enforced. Talk about a quick way to bankrupt a state. This is a litigation wet dream.

      So, is fighting illegal immigration wrong? No. Is this new law insanely stupid? Yes.

  • I copied and pasted this from the law Erick linked us to:

    "4. If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state or local government issued identification."

    You seem to have a lot in common with Eric Holder

Navigation

Markdown


You can use markdown in your comments and posts.

Contact


Support This Site






advertise_liberally.gif

Google Ads

Forums


scarlet_A.png

Advertise Liberally Blogroll

All Spin Zone
AMERICAblog
AmericanStreet
ArchPundit
BAGNewsnotes
The Bilerico Project
BlogACTIVE
BluegrassReport
Bluegrass Roots
Blue Indiana
BlueJersey
Blue Mass.Group
BlueOregon
BlueNC
Brendan Calling
BRAD Blog
Buckeye State Blog
Chris Floyd
Clay Cane
Calitics
CliffSchecter
ConfinedSpace
culturekitchen
David Corn
Dem Bloggers
Democrats.com
Deride and Conquer
Democratic Underground
Digby
DovBear
Drudge Retort
Ed Cone
ePluribis Media
Eschaton
Ezra Klein
Feministe
Firedoglake
Fired Up
First Draft
Frameshop
GreenMountain Daily
Greg Palast
Hoffmania
Horse's Ass
Hughes for America
In Search of Utopia
Is That Legal?
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Keystone Politics
Kick! Making PoliticsFun
KnoxViews
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Left Coaster
Left in the West
Liberal Avenger
Liberal Oasis
Loaded Orygun
MaxSpeak
Media Girl
Michigan Liberal
MinnesotaCampaign Report
Minnesota Monitor
My Left Nutmeg
My Two Sense
Nathan Newman
Needlenose
Nevada Today
News Dissector
News Hounds
Nitpicker
Oliver Willis
onegoodmove
PageOneQ
Pam's House Blend
Pandagon
PinkDome
Politics1
PoliticalAnimal
Political Wire
Poor Man Institute
Prairie State Blue
Progressive Historians
Raising Kaine
Raw Story
Reno Discontent
Republic of T
Rhode Island's Future
Rochester Turning
Rocky Mountain Report
Rod 2.0
Rude Pundit
Sadly, No!
Satirical Political Report
Shakesville
SirotaBlog
SistersTalk
Slacktivist
SmirkingChimp
SquareState
Suburban Guerrilla
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
Tapped
Tattered Coat
The Albany Project
The Blue State
The Carpetbagger Report
The Democratic Daily
The Hollywood Liberal
The Talent Show
This Modern World
Town Called Dobson
Wampum
WashBlog
Watching the Watchers
West Virginia Blue
Young Philly Politics
Young Turks