Arizona SB 1070. The "Illegal Immigrant law"

[Totenkopf]

Yeah, that does make it funnier in a way. As to BO's speech tonight, I doubt it'll be anything more in the end than platitudes. He just doesn't seem to be any more serious about the problem of border security than Bush was (more likely less so) or than he's been about protecting America's coastline in the face of the oil disaster. That it took >70 days to waive the Jones Act is not promising. Hopefully, Jimmy Carter Part Deux will end in 2012.

[mimartin]

If you think that republicans are the only ones that seem to think they were "above the law", then selectively was the right word.

 

Please show me where I have ever written that "I think that republicans are the only ones that seem to think they were 'above the law.'" When you can't, please feel free to apologize for making such asinine accusations.

[Tommycat]

Please show me where I have ever written that "I think that republicans are the only ones that seem to think they were 'above the law.'" When you can't, please feel free to apologize for making such asinine accusations.

 

actually I think you implied that with the 2001-2009 portion as if it began there. Personally I would have said that as far as I can remember those in power seem to believe they are above the law.

[mimartin]

actually I think you implied that with the 2001-2009 portion as if it began there. Personally I would have said that as far as I can remember those in power seem to believe they are above the law.

I blame the democrats in Congress just as much as the republicans in Congress for turning a blind eye on what the administration was doing with executive order, suppressing due process and using word play to allow torture practices which we as a country have defined as torture and condemned for about 50 years.

[Tommycat]

I blame the democrats in Congress just as much as the republicans in Congress for turning a blind eye on what the administration was doing with executive order, suppressing due process and using word play to allow torture practices which we as a country have defined as torture and condemned for about 50 years.

 

But you appear to be pushing more that the Republicans are the ones getting away with it. But I digress, as this has no bearing on the actual arguments here. I feel that the higher the office you hold, the more you should be scrutinized for the laws you are supposed to be upholding and passing(special note, keep in mind that AZ Senator McCain was one of the few Republicans with enough guts to stand up to Bush on the issue of torture).

 

Interestingly AZ Governor Brewer ALSO blasted the previous administration as she blasted Obama for not doing anything for the border. She said something along the lines of "It's apparent that this administration is going to continue the inaction of the previous administration on securing our border." Forgive me if the quote is not exact as I was quoting from memory of a news bite.

[Ping]

If anyone thought they were above the law, it was the previous administration. Not the Republicans, not the Democrats, but the previous administration and its supporters. It just so happened they were all Republicans.

[Totenkopf]

actually I think you implied that with the 2001-2009 portion as if it began there. Personally I would have said that as far as I can remember those in power seem to believe they are above the law.

 

 

 

Exactly. On both counts (the second which I mentioned as well).

[mimartin]

Exactly. On both counts (the second which I mentioned as well).

 

So you refuse to show where I wrote it?

 

Guess you can just make up the meaning to everything I write... I'm actually very careful to write what I mean, you don't have to read between the lines or make stuff up. Should you not understand, asking isn't beyond the realm of possible ways to determine what I really mean.

[Tommycat]

If anyone thought they were above the law, it was the previous administration. Not the Republicans, not the Democrats, but the previous administration and its supporters. It just so happened they were all Republicans.

 

HORSE PUCKEY!

The prior administration thought they were above the law as well. Democrats. The ones before. Republican. The ones before. Republican. The ones before Democrat. And now you are including the "supporters" in that. That is really reaching. I was a supporter, does that mean that I think I'm above the law? No it does not.

 

Look, this is a tangental discussion. Lets leave the Bush bashing out of this please. Unless you can somehow show me how the Bush administration allowing torture is somehow tied to SB1070 with a direct link then please JUST STOP IT!!! Seeing as how the bill was only written during THIS PRESIDENT'S term, we can safely ignore the bush administration feeling above the law over torture which has NO bearing on AZ-SB1070. From what I read of the 16 pages not ONE section refers to promoting torture.

 

I have been willing to step away from political affiliation and point out that even the Republican governor has condemned the inaction of the prior administration as well. I am willing to make a point of saying that the Bush administration which SHOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING especially after 9/11 in fact did NOTHING to help the situation. This is why SB 1070 has been enacted. Because AZ is sick of the lip service it has gotten from every administration that "Oh, Right that border thing... Yeah we'll do something about it." Then years later we have NOTHING.

[mimartin]

The prior administration thought they were above the law as well. Democrats. The ones before. Republican. The ones before. Republican. The ones before Democrat.

What? I'd give you Bill Clinton, but the Democrat before that was Jimmy Carter. Carter was a terrible President, but not a person that would put himself above the law. I would also say the same for the first George Bush, not a great President by any stretch of the imagination, but someone that seemed to respect the letter of the law. His son must have missed those lessons.

 

It almost looks like a pattern that respecting the law equals bad president, but then George W Bush shows that even someone that does not respect the law, can be terrible.

[Tommycat]

What? I'd give you Bill Clinton, but the Democrat before that was Jimmy Carter. Carter was a terrible President, but not a person that would put himself above the law. I would also say the same for the first George Bush, not a great President by any stretch of the imagination, but someone that seemed to respect the letter of the law. His son must have missed those lessons.

 

It almost looks like a pattern that respecting the law equals bad president, but then George W Bush shows that even someone that does not respect the law, can be terrible.

 

Good point. Actually I debated it a bit. GH Bush while essentially thumbing his nose at everything he promised did pay more than lip service to the law. Jimmy Carter, okay... he really didn't do enough to be said to be ignoring the law.

 

But it does show that the respect for the law and being "above the law" is not limited to party lines. Some people just have higher moral character than others. Which was the whole point of that tangent anyway. You and I are in full agreement that the first people to be investigated should be the AZ Legislators. I mean if they are going to make the law, they should absolutely 100% be held to that law they made.

 

Honestly I'm more ticked that Bush didn't do anything to help fix our borders than make a few speeches, and wave a lot. HE'S FROM A BORDER STATE FOR PETE'S SAKE. If anyone should know the problems associated with lack of border security it should have been him. Granted Obama has our former governor there in charge of DHS... ugh... she did nothing for our border when she was here, why would I expect her to do anything now that she's in DC. Well she did when we threatened to kick her out of office if she didn't.

 

Speaking of which I'm sick of hearing from people in Washington saying that it's their job to fix the border. Well no **** Sherlock! BUT it's because of the ongoing federal inaction that AZ felt the need to do this. Many other states are planning laws similar to SB-1070 as well. The Fed has not done it's job of providing border security. We have over 11 Million illegals in the country. Arizona has been facing large numbers of illegals flooding our borders. Our healthcare system has similarly been flooded with illegals in the ER who won't end up paying for their service because there is no way to track them down which then raises costs to those of us that are legal. And the fed has done NOTHING for DECADES!

[Totenkopf]

So, was anyone really surprised by the president's speech?

[Ping]

@Tommycat: I will agree with you there, the government hasn't really done much about illegals, and needs to do something. Even up here in PA, there's a significant Hispanic minority in my area, and a fairly good amount of which appear to be illegals.

[mimartin]

So, was anyone really surprised by the president's speech?

 

Why would anyone be surprised? Immigration reform is at this stage is a joke (which I’m actually happy about). We are coming up on mid-term elections, so the only thing those up for reelection are worried about is keeping their jobs, so they are not doing their job. If they were not worried about keeping their jobs we would gets some carefully worded bill that did nothing but grant amnesty for illegals already here. Just like the bill from the 1980’s that was supposed to do many of the things SB 1070 does, but was in reality an amnesty bill.

 

I really don’t understand why immigration reform and border security have to be tied so closely together. It seems to me before you have immigration reform that you must first be able to control your own border or immigration reform is a mute point. I also believe protecting the sovereignty of our borders is a federal responsibility. So I agree with the Republicans that asked President Obama to visit the border region. Have him visit the families of that U.S. citizen murdered along the U.S./Mexico border. Let him tell them that the U.S. is doing all that it can do to protect its citizens.

 

This is yet another problem that Obama inherited, but G.W. Bush, Clinton and George Bush also inherited the same problem; let us see if anything is done this time around. I have my doubts since nothing was by two of the previous Presidents “from” the border state of Texas.

[Tommycat]

So, was anyone really surprised by the president's speech?

 

I certainly wasn't. Condemning a law he hasn't read. The same old "We'll fix it" speech which may as well have been copy pasted from Reagan, GH Bush, Clinton, and GW Bush. I think maybe they need to have President Obama spend a month in Nogales, AZ. After he's seen what it's doing to that community, MAYBE he might do more than give us the same tired speeches that GW gave us.

 

Keep in mind that we have been doing more for reducing illegal immigration here in AZ than just SB-1070. Parts of SB-1070 give teeth to a bill that was passed during GW's presidency. While we're conservative, we're not just going to give a pass to Bush because he's a Republican. We've been trying to get the fed to do something about border security at least as long as I've been in AZ.

 

Obama talking about how illegal immigration is down... Well DUH! Hey dingbat, maybe it's BECAUSE of SB-1070. Maybe it's because employers who have been hiring illegals have finally got the hint that we're not going to allow that anymore. So there's less jobs for illegals. Mexico knows about SB1070, and illegals and smugglers have heard about SB1070. They aren't coming when they know there's a credible threat. Big friggin shocker illegal immigration is down.

 

These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound.

HE Still doesn't understand that YOU CANNOT BE STOPPED TO ASK IF YOU ARE A CITIZEN. YOU HAVE TO VIOLATE THE LAW FIRST(and by that I mean violate ANOTHER law other than immigration)! Good heavens. Is it too much to ask the PRESIDENT that keeps speaking out about it to actually READ 16 pages?

 

Migrant workers -– mostly here illegally -– have been the labor force of our farmers and agricultural producers for generations. So even if it was possible, a program of mass deportations would disrupt our economy and communities in ways that most Americans would find intolerable.

Migrant workers. I'm so sick of hearing that one. He's African American and doesn't recognize slavery when he sees it? Using his argument, slavery should have just continued because it would have so disrupted our economy and community. Though in fairness it did lead to the Civil War... Maybe he doesn't want that... Even if for the slaves he's not a part of.

 

Years before the statue was built -- years before it would be seen by throngs of immigrants craning their necks skyward at the end of long and brutal voyage, years before it would come to symbolize everything that we cherish -- she imagined what it could mean. She imagined the sight of a giant statue at the entry point of a great nation -– but unlike the great monuments of the past, this would not signal an empire. Instead, it would signal one’s arrival to a place of opportunity and refuge and freedom.

Of course he got the initial intent of the Statue of Liberty WRONG! No shocker there either. The Statue of Liberty is carrying the torch of liberty to the rest of the world. And by the way, the poem was placed inside the pedestal that was funded by donations, the statue was funded by the French. But I can forgive him for that. Few people know that the statue was a GIFT from the French...

 

edit: @mimartin - Maybe the Bushes thought that we could get by like Texas with a natural border like the Rio Grande(yes I know that in some places it's shallow enough to walk across). Actually some things that SB 1070 does are only able to be done by state and local governments. Like taking away business licenses.

[mimartin]

HE Still doesn't understand that YOU CANNOT BE STOPPED TO ASK IF YOU ARE A CITIZEN. YOU HAVE TO VIOLATE THE LAW FIRST(and by that I mean violate ANOTHER law other than immigration)! Good heavens. Is it too much to ask the PRESIDENT that keeps speaking out about it to actually READ 16 pages?

I’ve read the bill you linked and my concern over it is the same as Obama’s as stated in post #20. Asserting he has not read the Bill is disingenuous since you can read the bill and still have these concerns.

 

Let’s be honest, police have been given the authority to pull anyone over whenever they like. I’ve been pulled over for crossing the white line on a county road. Problem with that excuse was the road had no markers on it whatsoever. Still the Police Officer used it as an excuse to search my rent car. I guess a Lincoln Continental with a driver that had not shaved for a week in the middle of nowhere was a little suspicious. Still I wish I would have taken a picture of him when he yell “what this” while pulling out a old fruit cake tin with a Ziplock bag hanging out of it. The look of disappointment on his face when he found only cookie crumbs was priceless. Guess he wanted a cookie.

[Tommycat]

@mimartin The problem is that the same argument could be made for ANY law.

 

oh and a little clarification, from the Sheriff's department in Pima county talking about a training video to remind them how to fairly enforce the law.

For the Sheriff's Department, because the law really does mirror the federal law, this makes no difference to us, it's not going to change the way we do business at all

Woulda used Maricopa, but everyone knows how Arpayo feels.

 

I woulda been mad too mimartin... I woulda wanted the cookies.

 

Oh and from the video:

In the video, Ginn warns: "The reality is that the ethnic mix of our community is such that race tells you nothing about whether or not a person is unlawfully in the United States," adding that the same is true of ethnicity.

 

Ginn said the best course for officers to follow is to ask for identification in the circumstances in which they would normally make such a request. She said that if individuals have one of the acceptable forms of ID, including an Arizona driver's license, a tribal ID card or another document that requires proof of legal presence in the country to obtain, "that's the end of your inquiry."

 

If someone doesn't have acceptable identification, Ginn said, officers can consider factors such as fleeing, engaging in evasive maneuvers, an inability to provide a home address, or having a foreign vehicle registration.

 

note: sorry for the multiple edits, I'm searching for the ACTUAL police training video.

edit again: found it here

[Totenkopf]

Watch the vid and it becomes clear that much of the flame fanning vs the bill from its opponents is empty overheated rhetoric, often based in the malignant supposition that the cops and lawmakers are all inherently racist goons looking for a reason to harass non-whites. Still, if the feds would quite making excuses or playing politics, things like this wouldn't be necessary.

[Tommycat]

Watch the vid and it becomes clear that much of the flame fanning vs the bill from its opponents is empty overheated rhetoric, often based in the malignant supposition that the cops and lawmakers are all inherently racist goons looking for a reason to harass non-whites. Still, if the feds would quite making excuses or playing politics, things like this wouldn't be necessary.

Yeah I noticed that they said repeatedly, "I know you already know this and practice this, BUT just to make extra sure you aren't going to go about it any different we're telling you again anyway."

[Darth Avlectus]

Interesting, congressional reports of OTM (other than mexicans) statistics. Anyone concerned with border security as a preventative measure against terrorism might be somewhat vindicated by this.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/23436627/detail.html

[JediAthos]

The AP has reported that the Justice Department will indeed file a lawsuit against the State of Arizona challenging the constitutionality of the law and charging that it usurps Federal authority.

 

I'm sure this will make the illegals happy as I'm not entirely certain the law can effect as long as there is a standing legal challenge to it.

[Tommycat]

The AP has reported that the Justice Department will indeed file a lawsuit against the State of Arizona challenging the constitutionality of the law and charging that it usurps Federal authority.

 

I'm sure this will make the illegals happy as I'm not entirely certain the law can effect as long as there is a standing legal challenge to it.

Sad thing is that while here in AZ we aren't so much divided along party lines(Two of our Liberal Democrat congresspersons, Rep Harry Mitchell and Rep Ann Kirkpatrick, joined Senator Kyle and Senator McCain in denouncing the legal action), as Obama would have you believe. This is not about party.

 

The challenge is not going to go well for the administration. The only thing it will do is generate a lot of bad press for them. More than 75% of the country supports AZ-SB-1070. Of course if you go by FoxNews polls, greater than 95% feel the Fed is at fault(not even bothering with a link, as everyone knows that even if FNC is "fair and balanced" their polls are so heavily skewed by conservatives...).

 

IF it ends up that the Fed says only the Fed can enforce it's laws, then I could see some local governments ceasing enforcement of other federal crimes. Rob a federal bank? Meh that's the fed's job.

 

If Obama feels it's so safe here, that we can wait for the fed to do something about it, have him show it by taking up residence in Nogales. Or so he doesn't have to give up his security, have him move someone he cares about there.

[Darth Avlectus]

It's a double edge. If the AZ state law (comparatively lenient), fashioned after federal law (much stricter), is ruled unconstitutional, then would that not also invalidate the fed's own law? Not that the ones challenging it would care, they need serfs to rally to vote for them--and eventually to kick around.

 

If it is constitutional, then every state may well make its own similar immigration laws.

[Tommycat]

It's a double edge. If the AZ state law (comparatively lenient), fashioned after federal law (much stricter), is ruled unconstitutional, then would that not also invalidate the fed's own law? Not that the ones challenging it would care, they need serfs to rally to vote for them--and eventually to kick around.

 

If it is constitutional, then every state may well make its own similar immigration laws.

From what I understand, they are not challenging the constitutionality of the immigration portion so much as state enforcing federal law. It's all a dog and pony show. Obama probably knows that it won't hold water. I think he just wants to show that he "cares" for the little guy.

 

Either that or he's hoping that with state budgets already strained, we'll cave simply to avoid the cost of a legal battle. If he really believes that, then he didn't spend enough time listening to Jan Brewer. her commitment to AZ would make Ahab say, "Oh come on, that's obsessive!"

 

Is this the kind of "change" Obama wants? Now not only are you not enforcing immigration, but now you're actively fighting someone willing to do something about it?

[Totenkopf]

But it's to be expected. The main thrust of this administration is to try to foist an amnesty scheme on the country and any attempt to actually enforce existing laws about the border is either passe or just inconvenient. AZ is making the feds look bad (not that they need much help, mind you ). Federal policy on border security has been a joke for several decades (if not longer).