Arizona's New Immigration Law

The primary point to this statute is to provide for the state to take action against any locality that refuses to enforce laws already in place. This law brings a uniform state-wide policy to bear to combat the problems that AZ has been facing for years while politicians on both sides of the aisle in DC bury their heads, while trying to appeal/not offend to the Hispanic voting bloc.

In a nutshell it makes the "sanctuary cities" liable for legal action by the state for not enforcing Federal and State of Arizona law. This I'm sure is a bigger problem in AZ than it is in VA. But I live in the sanctuary city of Virginia Beach. The previous Mayor and police chief had a policy to not report illegals to ICE, in addition to the burden illegal immigrants put on the City services (police, medical, social services) two teenage girls are dead, directly because of this policy (killed by a drunk driving illegal who had been released twice before for alcohol issues).

Here's the a link to the actual text of the statutes:

Text of Arizona's Anti-Illegal Immigration Law - Part 1 | KEYTLaw (http://www.keytlaw.com/blog/2010/04/anti-illegal-immigration-law-part-1/)

These statutes seek enforcement not only directly against illegal immigrants but also against companies that employ them.

President Obama is making a purely political play (and he damn well knows it) in misrepresenting what these statutes contain. This isn't about racism, it's about AZ protecting the people of the state from the negative consequences of illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, the murder of the rancher was the straw that broke the camels' back.

What did Obama say that misrepresented the law? To the best of my knowledge, he made some general comments about it, but never cited anything specifically that's contained therein.

As far as making politics out of this, you have reasonable Republicans coming out against this law too. This isn't a right vs. left issue. I don't see how either party gains political advantage on this one.

Go read the law so you no what your talking about. They can only question someone if they are pulled over for something else like speeding first.


know

you're

know

you'reYou haven't been hear long. Youwl get used to redding firstdowns posts.

It's a politcal ploy in that the fringe regional Republicans are attempting to force the administration to push through an immigration policy they can use as a wedge issue to siphon off independents. But it's a weak ploy, and it won't pass the Federal Court sniff test.

I am jsut trying to convey, this law is not good for anyone who does not like being pulled by police.

i agree....
but your previous post (and this one too kinda) implies that drunk drivers are among the people who dont like being pulled over and i think we all agree that they should be.
i assume you meant that if you have 2 beers and are not drunk, you don't need to be hassled by the cops on the off chance that you fail a breathalizer or something.....

What did Obama say that misrepresented the law? To the best of my knowledge, he made some general comments about it, but never cited anything specifically that's contained therein.

As far as making politics out of this, you have reasonable Republicans coming out against this law too. This isn't a right vs. left issue. I don't see how either party gains political advantage on this one.
See post # 7. One thing Obama is NOT, is stupid. I'm just a guy on a messageboard and I found the info on the law in less than 5 min. Obama knows exactly what's in/not in the statutes. What he stated is certainly not something that can reasonably be assumed to happen the way they're written. For him to make the statement he did is a purely political play.

I don't know who the "reasonable Republicans" are coming out against this law, but I'll bet it's safe to assume they're pandering to a Hispanic voting bloc in their district/state. You're absolutely correct, the security of the people of the U.S. isn't a right/left issue and I'll bet you could take a handful of members from this board, on both sides of the political spectrum, and come up with a reasonable solution to the illegal immigration issue that satisifed both sides. However, for the vast majority of politicians in DC its about power and keeping their jobs. The Hispanic voting bloc is already (or will be very shortly) the largest minority voting bloc in the country. How this issue is spun is key to gaining/losing support with a good portion of this voting bloc....so I would say there is definitely politcal advantage to be had here.

It's a politcal ploy in that the fringe regional Republicans are attempting to force the administration to push through an immigration policy they can use as a wedge issue to siphon off independents. But it's a weak ploy, and it won't pass the Federal Court sniff test.Really, have you read the statutes? The vast majority of them are a re-enforcement of existing Arizona and Federal law.

Its kind of like breathalyzer laws. If you get pulled over for a illegal u-turn or a non-dui related issues and then a officer has a suspicion to believe you have been drinking he can require you to take a breathalyzer, in VA. In VA you have to submit to breathalyzers as part of your agreement to hold a drivers license.

So this just requires non-citizens to carry documentation papers with them at all times, but citizens do not have to. As long as police cannot approach someone or detain them on suspicion of being illegal, and as long as citizens or people the police cannot verify are illegal are immediately sent on their way I got no beef with the law. If you get stopped for doing something wrong police should be able to verify someone’s right to live here.

I remember seeing this sign when i visited CA early this year:

stock photo - Caution:Illegal Immigrant Crossing (http://www.cgstock.com/5399)

They dont put these signs up because there isnt a serious problem going on. These states have to do something.

Really, have you read the statutes? The vast majority of them are a re-enforcement of existing Arizona and Federal law.

Well what's gonna make this law enforced when the previous ones were not enforced?

Its kind of like breathalyzer laws. If you get pulled over for a illegal u-turn or a non-dui related issues and then a officer has a suspicion to believe you have been drinking he can require you to take a breathalyzer, in VA. In VA you have to submit to breathalyzers as part of your agreement to hold a drivers license.

So this just requires non-citizens to carry documentation papers with them at all times, but citizens do not have to. As long as police cannot approach someone or detain them on suspicion of being illegal, and as long as citizens or people the police cannot verify are illegal are immediately sent on their way I got no beef with the law. If you get stopped for doing something wrong police should be able to verify someone’s right to live here.

I remember seeing this sign when i visited CA early this year:

stock photo - Caution:Illegal Immigrant Crossing (http://www.cgstock.com/5399)

They dont put these signs up because there isnt a serious problem going on. These states have to do something.


Why is it so urgent now and not while Bush was in office? The timing of this is fishy.