Arizona passes strict illegal immigration act
The bill directs police to determine the immigration status of
noncriminals if there is a 'reasonable suspicion' they are undocumented.
Immigrant rights groups say it amounts to a police state.
By Nicholas Riccardi
The Los Angeles Times
April 13, 2010
Reporting from Denver
Arizona lawmakers on Tuesday approved what foes and
supporters agree is the toughest measure in the country against illegal
immigrants, directing local police to determine whether people are in
the country legally.
The measure, long sought by opponents of illegal 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 illegal 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 illegal immigrants into this
country, as the state most aggressively using its own laws to fight
illegal immigration. In 2006 the state passed a law that would dissolve
companies with a pattern of hiring illegal immigrants. Last year it made
it a crime for a government worker to give improper benefits to an
illegal 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 that they would be the first to do it since they're
ground zero for illegal immigration," he said.
Krikorian added that he doubted the law would be used much. "Obviously,
their prosecutors aren't going to go out and prosecute every illegal
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 that 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 that a federal court
struck down a New Hampshire law in 2005 that said illegal immigrants
were trespassing, declaring that only the federal government has the
authority to enforce immigration. Another provision of the Arizona law,
which makes day laborers illegal, 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 illegal immigrants.
His actions have drawn a civil rights investigation from the Department
of Justice but strong praise from Arizonans. Other agencies have argued
against Arpaio's stance, saying that they need illegal 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.
"Illegal 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.
--
Internet group address:
http://groups.google.com/group/ChicagoMayDay
To send e-mail:
Chicag...@googlegroups.com
To unsuscribe:
ChicagoMayDa...@googlegroups.com