| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Sheriff Joe Arpaio |
|
|
Arizona becomes Police State
The
bill directs police to determine the
immigration status of non-criminals if
there is a 'reasonable suspicion' they
are undocumented. Immigrant rights
groups say it amounts to a police state.
PHOENIX
(By
Nicholas Riccardi, LATimes)
April 14, 2010
―
Arizona lawmakers on Tuesday approved
what foes and supporters agree is the
toughest measure in the country against
undocumented immigrants, directing local
police to determine whether people are
in the country legally.
The measure, long sought by opponents of
undocumented immigration, passed 35 to
21 in the state House of
Representatives.
The state Senate passed a similar
measure earlier this year, and
Republican Gov. Jan Brewer is expected
to sign the bill.
The bill's author, State Sen. Russell
Pearce, said it simply "takes the
handcuffs off of law enforcement and
lets them do their job."
But police were deeply divided on the
matter, with police unions backing it
but the state police chief's association
opposing the bill, contending it could
erode trust with immigrants who could be
potential witnesses.
Immigrant rights groups were horrified,
and contended that Arizona would be
transformed into a police state.
"It's beyond the pale," said Chris
Newman, legal director of the National
Day Laborer Organizing Network. "It
appears to mandate racial profiling."
The bill, known as SB 1070, makes it a
misdemeanor to lack proper immigration
paperwork in Arizona. It also requires
police officers, if they form a
"reasonable suspicion" that someone is
an undocumented immigrant, to determine
the person's immigration status.
Currently, officers can inquire about
someone's immigration status only if the
person is a suspect in another crime.
The bill allows officers to avoid the
immigration issue if it would be
impractical or hinder another
investigation.
Citizens can sue to compel police
agencies to comply with the law, and no
city or agency can formulate a policy
directing its workers to ignore the law
― a provision that advocates say
prevents so-called sanctuary orders that
police not inquire about people's
immigration status.
The bill cements the position of
Arizona, whose border with Mexico is the
most popular point of entry for
undocumented immigrants into this
country, as the state most aggressively
using its own laws to fight undocumented
immigration. In 2006 the state passed a
law that would dissolve companies with a
pattern of hiring undocumented
immigrants. Last year it made it a crime
for a government worker to give improper
benefits to an undocumented immigrant.
Mark Krikorian at the Center for
Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C.,
think tank that advocates tougher
immigration enforcement, said the
legislation was a logical extension of
the state's previous enforcement
efforts.
"It makes sense they would be the first
to do it since they're ground zero for
undocumented immigration," he said.
Krikorian added he doubted the law would
be used much. "Obviously, their
prosecutors aren't going to go out and
prosecute every undocumented alien," he
said. "It gives police and prosecutors
another tool should they need it."
Opponents, however, raised the specter
of officers untrained in immigration law
being required to determine who is in
the country legally. They noted though
the bill says race cannot solely be used
to form a suspicion about a person's
legality, it implicitly allows it to be
a factor.
"A lot of U.S. citizens are going to be
swept up in the application of this law
for something as simple as having an
accent and leaving their wallet at
home," said Alessandra Soler Meetze,
president of the American Civil
Liberties Union of Arizona.
The ACLU and other groups have vowed to
sue to block the bill from taking effect
should Brewer sign it. They note a
federal court struck down a New
Hampshire law in 2005 that said
undocumented immigrants were
trespassing, declaring only the federal
government has the authority to enforce
immigration. Another provision of the
Arizona law, which makes day laborers
undocumented, violates the 1st
Amendment, critics contend.
The issue of local enforcement of
immigration laws has been especially
heated in Arizona, where Maricopa County
Sheriff Joe Arpaio has taken an
aggressive stance, conducting sweeps in
immigrant-heavy neighborhoods to round
up undocumented immigrants.
His actions have drawn a civil rights
investigation from the Department of
Justice but strong praise from white
Arizonans. Other agencies have argued
against Arpaio's stance, saying they
need undocumented immigrants to trust
them enough to report crimes.
Brewer, a Republican, has not taken a
public stance on the bill. She replaced
Janet Napolitano, a Democrat who became
President Obama's Homeland Security
chief last year. Napolitano had vetoed
similar bills in the past. Brewer faces
a primary challenge next month; most
observers expect her to sign the
measure.
Some Republicans have privately
complained about the bill, which Pearce
has been pushing for several years, but
were loath to vote against it in an
election year. The House was scheduled
to approve it last week but the vote was
delayed until Tuesday to give sponsors a
chance to round up enough votes. It
picked up steam after the killing late
last month of a rancher on the Arizona
side of the Mexican border. Footprints
from the crime scene led back to Mexico.
In an impassioned debate Tuesday, both
sides relied on legal and moral
arguments.
"Undocumented immigration brings crime,
kidnapping, drugs ― drains our
government services," said Rep. John
Kavanagh, a Republican. "Nobody can
stand on the sidelines and not take part
in this battle."
Democrats were just as passionate. "This
bill, whether we intend it or not,
terrorizes the people we profit from,"
said Rep. Tom Chabin.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|