Sunday, July 11, 2010
Arizona law on illegal aliens
Not sure I agree with this or not, but I definitely think POTUS joking about it at the correspondence dinner was classless. The reason states such as Arizona are desperate are because the federal government has done nothing to curb the problem. On the other hand, the old saying goes, "you might beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride". Here is a question that I don't know the answer to. If a Hispanic person from another state (one where illegals can get a driver's license) is pulled over, will a drivers license be ample proof of citizenship?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
No, a DL would not be proof of citizenship for anybody. If an illegal from another state is pulled over and is deemed by a trained police officer to exhibit traits of an illegal alien, he/she will be asked to prove citizenship, likely with a valid SS#, that can be run through federal databases by federal officers at the request of AZ law enforcement.
If that is true, it is rather disturbing to me. Seems like a legal citizen could easily end up in jail if they don't have all their papers. Sure, the charges will get dropped once Arizona can contact the Feds, but what a pain. Who carries their SS card anyway?
I do....keep my social security card on me. It weighs NOTHING and burdens me very little. ;) And I know the number off the top of my head. I 'spose if you rambled off your number, they ran it, and it comes back as you, you're golden.
Since I know you, Brett, I know you speak English reasonably well, likely do have a valid DL, likely do carry proof of insurance, your vehicle is likely registered in your name, your tags are valid, you wouldn't be evasive in answering questions regarding your citizenship, and would never be suspected of being here illegally.
OTHERS, however, that would have problems with those things should probably carry their SS card or a passport in addition to their DL. Then they, too, will be golden.
Your argument is a red herring used by opposers with NO validity whatsoever. You could just as EASILY be pulled over and be suspected of committing a murder. It CAN happen. Law enforcement has had this authority since its inception. Right now, when you get pulled over by DPS, you are questioned in such a way that if red flags go up, you can quickly and justly be suspected of trafficking drugs. Because you do not exhibit the traits, you are questioned no further. That is a fact. Same thing here. There is no money in it for AZ Law Enforcement to waste their time on people who do not genuinely appear illegal.
There is NOTHING wrong with this law. They absolutely mirrored the federal law.
I hope you are right that this law will not be used to harass undesirable citizens. Only time will tell. I sympathize with the need for stricter enforcement, and with the Feds would do more about it, but I'm still not sure this law is a good idea. There seems to be too much discretion left to law enforcement, which we know is often abused.
The only red herring is the idea that I can be pulled over for murder. It sounds to me as if anyone that doesn't speak good English, better carry proof of citizenship. I wonder, what if the officer suspects these documents are forged?
I just LOST my very beautifully worded response because of some log in issue. GRRRRRRRR
"There seems to be too much discretion left to law enforcement, which we know is often abused." - That pretty much holds true for every single law on the books.
My comment about being detained for murder is NOT a red herring, but a fabulous example. There are APB's out for people all the time. However, when you get pulled over, if you do not match the description, you are NOT detained.
Same thing with Sobriety tests. Law enforcement has the authority to administer them. The do NOT, however, administer them to EVERYONE they pull over. They are trained to be able to tell, and use that judgment just as they would in this case.
Poorly spoken English cannot and will not be the only criteria. BUT, if you speak English poorly and are a nervous type, then, perhaps, you should go ahead and snag that SS card and a Passport. ;)
Yes, the APB is for a specific crime that we know happened. The immigration law seems more of a fishing expedition.
It would be more like assuming a murder has happened, and that murders most often are committed by those with red shirts. The red shirt is "reasonable suspicion.", and anyone wearing one must be able to give an accurate account of their whereabouts.
And I disagree that every law gives the same discretion to law enforcement. That is the art of writing criminal law to give and restrict the discretion to law enforcement, prosecution, and the judiciary.
I guess we will just have to see how it plays out...
"Yes, the APB is for a specific crime that we know happened." - Check with the folks in AZ, and I ASSURE you, they are aware of the MILLIONS of SPECIFIC crimes committed each day by ILLEGAL aliens. By simply BEING HERE, they are committing a SPECIFIC CRIME. That's why they are being pursued by this law, which, again, mirrors the federal law that has already passed muster.
Already, illegals are fleeing AZ....so it is working pretty well so far. AZ is their own state, with their own citizens, and their own elections. It'll play out the way they want it, or they'll modify it or remove it from the books. That's THEIR prerogative.
NOW, if we could just get Texas to do the same thing.
That's THEIR prerogative.
Unless I missed something, a state cannot pass a law that violates the US constitution. I'm not saying that this law does or doesn't, but it is not necessarily a states prerogative to pass any law they want.
As immigration is an enumerated power of the federal government (which they are doing nothing about), so it does seem to be debatable at best. Also, I wonder about the full faith and credit clause. It seems as if ID from one state should be accepted in another, but I'd have to ponder that one a bit more.
And this law does not violate the US Constitution.
ID's from many states, Texas included, mean NOTHING in regards to immigration status. So, while still recognized, they serve no purpose in reagrds to this law.
SO, if I were a poor speaker of English, did not have current insurance or registration for my vehicle, and was not able to answer simple questions about my citizenry, I'd carry my passport with me....unless, as the evidence would suggest, I was ILLEGAL! LOL
I understand what you are saying about IDs not dealing with immigration status, but the fact that you MAY need papers to drive seems to go against the full faith and credit clause. I can see arguments either way, but I think it is a concern.
I think someone with a registered vehicle, insurance, and a valid ID could still be suspected as an illegal alien.
I deleted some posts that I had double-published.
Post a Comment