Blog Entry

The Arizona immigration law

Posted on: May 3, 2010 9:32 pm
Edited on: May 3, 2010 9:33 pm
No matter what you think of it, read this before forming a final opinion.

There is talk of an All-Star Game boycott. I'm sure at some point next season's national championship game (in Glendale, Ariz.) will come into play. I'll have a take on all this in a future column but wanted to pass this along.
Category: NCAAF

Since: Nov 11, 2009
Posted on: May 4, 2010 6:56 am

The Arizona immigration law


Your charge about 'ignorant people' is quite offensive. States do not have the power to enforce immigration laws. You are either naiive or mendacious suggesting this is a simple and rather innocent matter. The fact is the law does not define "reasonable suspicion". In particular, there is no requirement that a crime be committed, it is enough for the police to have a suspicion. In the rest of the US, if you are stopped with reasonable cause and refuse to show your identity (or do not have it) it might mean a trip to the precinct. In Arizona you are guilty of a crime and can be tossed in jail.

I suppose you might feel differently if the illegal immigrants people were concerned about were Irish and it was you who would need to be concerned about carrying your identity papers (or perhaps concerned for your children).

Racial profiling will happen under the Arizona law -- that is what it is designed to do after all. If you are honest with yourself you know that. This is a law designed to target Hispanics and not illegal immigrants per se. I wonder how many of the enlightened majority in Arizona would react if they believed they might be stopped and asked for their papers and upon failure to show such be tossed into jail and fined. Odd that so many conservatives could favor a law giving the state the power to make you a criminal because you do not have your indentity papers with you. It seems the liberals are the real conservatives here, concerned with the constitutional rights of individuals in this country.

The violation of the first and fourth amendments looks clear enough to me and I am sure this law will not meet the constitutional test. In the interim, it labels Arizona and the majority of its citizens as unconcerned about individual liberty in the face of the state. From where I sit, that's a principled basis for supporting a boycott. The only thing I find positive about this is the cost of the lawsuits the citizens of Arizona will have to pay.

Since: May 4, 2010
Posted on: May 4, 2010 5:31 am

Still Smokin...and clueless

This law was written by the legislature and passed long before the "one, yes one" rancher was murdered.  By the way, it was nice of you to let everyone know just how much you value the life of "one, yes one" murdered rancher.  You are either inexcusably uninformed or a blatant liar if you think this law was in any way a response to or even remotely related to the murder of that "one, yes one" rancher.

Um, guess what?  The 18 year old gang banger was already packing.  Again, you're either inexcusably uninformed or intentionally trying to misrepresent Arizona laws.  News flash:  Criminals do not follow laws.  Now, however, the next gang banger who tries to harm me or my family will have to think twice as I may be armed, too. 

I am worried about illegal aliens, violent criminals or not.  There, now you know one of the 70% of Arizonans who support this law.  If you really want to increase the Arizona treasury, try cutting the cost of supporting 500,000 illegals who use health, education and other services without paying for it.  That's right, all those illegals working for cash under the table do NOT pay taxes as some would like us to believe.  We already know that 48% of all Americans pay no federal taxes and I think it’s a sure bet that illegals who do pay taxes fall into the income bracket of those 48% and have all of their taxes refunded.

I suggest you consider moving to a state that is more to your liking.  California has very low taxes, a strong budget, loves pot heads and needs people like you to help it continue down its path of prosperity.  Good riddance.

Since: May 4, 2010
Posted on: May 4, 2010 4:54 am

How about linking to the actual law rather than

a bunch of comments by ignoarnt people who have no idea what the law states.  The law simply codifies into state law existing federal law, period.  Laws applicable to the US are almost always replicated by the states.  A single criminal act of fraud, theft or murder, for example, is always a violation of federal AND state laws.  If one jurisdiction chooses not to prosecute, the other is not precluded from prosecuting.  Similarly, federal law madates LEGAL non-citizens carry immigration papers, period.  Arizona law simply replicates that law.  Furthermore, the Arizona standard for asking a suspect about their legal status is exactly the same as the federal standard.  While the federal government may be solely responsible for controlling the federal borders, it is not solely responsible for controlling criminal activity that occurs within the federal borders.  It is entirely appropriate for the State of Arizona to control criminal activity within the State of Arizona.  Will the law be stayed or even overturned at some point?  Of that I have no doubt.  Nevertheless, it will be upheld by the SCOTUS.

Since: Aug 20, 2006
Posted on: May 4, 2010 4:07 am

The Arizona immigration law

Please show your support for the state of Arizona, we need lots of help in this state, but like the article said, "stop and think twice." In fact, think a couple more times about it. This article, although different from the others you may have read (or more likely not read, just skimmed over the headlines), is that this article doesn't give the full story either. I'm not sure Mr. Whitley has read the entire law, or if he knew that the disclaimer " before anyone can be even be suspected, they have to be part of a "lawful stop, detention or arrest,"" was added a week after the law was originally passed. It was only added in order to mask the real intent of the law. 

I wonder if the writer knows that this law was a knee-jerk reaction by state politicians because ONE, YES ONE rancher was killed, probably by an illegal immigrant, but not just any illegal immigrant, they think it was a member of a crime family that smuggles weapons and drugs and people.

I'd be willing to bet that the statistics the writer used were released by the Arizona Governor's office. I live here, nobody polled me. I run in a large social circle, and I certainly don't know of very many people who actually support this law. The writer also failed to mention that this law gives the right to citizens to file a lawsuit against a town, city or the state, if they don't think that police are doing enough to enforce this law. Are you kidding me? How many truly racist extremists will it take to shut down the court system in this state? A court system that already is overburdened and underfunded. Hell, just last week, a man here in Tucson sped through a red light and crashed into a car, killing a grandmother and a 4 year old girl, nearly killing the girl's pregnant mother, and he will not be charged with any crime because police were instructed to not make arrests in car accidents like this. 

Please don't misunderstand me. Something needs to be done here in Arizona, but this isn't it. Most people are not worried about the immigrants themselves, its the organized criminals that are smuggling many of them in, along with drugs and guns. If state government really wanted to help the citizens of our state they would legalize the drugs that these groups are smuggling into our country through our state. If Arizona could tax the drugs, making much needed revenue, at the same time cutting out many of the criminals' need to illegally enter our state, it would make a far greater impact on more people. Nonetheless, they think its better to pit neighbor against neighbor, just after passing another ridiculous law allowing everyone in our state to carry a concealed weapon. Yes, that 18 year old gangbanger now has the right to carry a concealed weapon. The asshole that harasses your girlfriend at work, better be careful standing up for your lady, because that asshole can carry his concealed weapon legally now, even in a school or church. WooHoo. We're really making progress in this state now.

Since: Aug 21, 2006
Posted on: May 4, 2010 2:35 am

The Arizona immigration law

I'm seriously considering taking a trip down to Arizona this year to show my support.

Since: Sep 7, 2008
Posted on: May 4, 2010 1:49 am

The Arizona immigration law

The funniest part is how Mexico's immigration law is so much stricter than ours, but nobody bothered to boycott Mexico. No other developed country in the world would let people flood into their country like we do. I'll root for the diamondbacks and anything else Arizona to do my part to combat the crazies who don't seem to understand a common sense notion like stopping illegal immigration.

Since: Jan 17, 2007
Posted on: May 3, 2010 11:52 pm

The Arizona immigration law

If you bother to read the law, rather than just vent your reverse racism, you'd know that if someone is, say, pulled over for speeding or whatever, and shows a valid driver's license, they will NOT be asked for any kind of "papers" (green card).  Only if they run your d/l and find that it's a fake id would they then ask for the green card.  The far left liberals are trying to make this into something that it isn't, and they need to focus their anger at Washington, DC, not AZ. 

Since: Aug 30, 2007
Posted on: May 3, 2010 11:21 pm

Quit whining!

I'm white and I get pulled over, believe me.

Since: Dec 11, 2008
Posted on: May 3, 2010 11:19 pm

The Arizona immigration law

The link shows a masive naviete of the author.  Ask an african american if they have been pulled over for being black it happens all the time now it will happen with latinos as well.  When an officer pulls you over what leads him to believe your not legal other than race or accent?

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or