RSS feed for comments on this post.
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://poliblogger.com/wp-trackback.html?p=18325
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
0.179 Powered by Wordpress
[...] tip- Poliblog SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: "Florida Senate candidate has qualms about Arizona immigration law", [...]
Pingback by Florida Senate candidate has qualms about Arizona immigration law | ROK Drop — Tuesday, April 27, 2024 @ 12:48 pm
Even Tancredo has issues with the law.
Comment by Honza — Wednesday, April 28, 2024 @ 9:54 am
Even Tom Tancredo (former Congressman, former presidential candidate on an anti-illegal kick) has issues with the law per a story from ILW.com.
Comment by Honza — Wednesday, April 28, 2024 @ 9:55 am
Yup. In fact, I noted that in another post on the law in question.
Comment by Steven L. Taylor — Wednesday, April 28, 2024 @ 12:36 pm
I'm a CA resident, and I actually sent this guy a campaign contribution! If he can't man-up and recognize the importance of AZ Governor Brewer's legislation, I want nothing to do with him. When will the American people acknowledge the reality of what the Latino movemnet is doing to our country? Do we really want to be reduced to third-world status? Is this what we envision for our children and grandchildren? Why did our founders go to the lengths they did to write the Constitution if we would eventually spit in their faces for their efforts? The U.S. is a SOVEREIGN country, meaning that we citizens are GUARANTEED secure borders and protection for foreign invasion. Are we really going to sit passively and watch our once bold, beatiful country slip into oblivion? One would think not, but then…..
Comment by mmcalgal43 — Wednesday, April 28, 2024 @ 1:34 pm
I just finished watching a C-Span interview with one of the architects of the law. He was a (R) legislator and 20 year+ law enforcement (finished a detective). It was quite informative, both in the nature of the law and the intent, and even insights into its crafting. In many ways it reassured me about some of the controversial points, but I will continue to have to watch how it is enforced (profiling and intimidation, etc). The state law mirrors federal law fairly closely, actually, and in many cases puts more safety nets in place to protect the public from overreach.
Among my resolved issues: no one is required to carry “papers” (which is actually WEAKER then federal law for immigrants). If, though, they voluntarily offer over papers (such as driver's license) they are automatically assumed to be legal. Also, this law does not empower immigration checks in and of themselves…they must be done in with probable cause, generally in association with already being under suspicion (i.e. rolling through a stop sign and ending up with a seat belt ticket as well). Racial profiling is specifically illegal as a sole basis for a check, as any trained officer already would know. It has also been pointed out by many that racial profiling is also completely impractical, as AZ is roughly a third Latino. Many people in large majority white populations fail to realize that AZ officers neither want to or are capable of profiling such a large population. Police chiefs, during the crafting process, specifically demanded certain features that would safe-guard their officers from potential pit-falls. Examples: immigration status checks cannot interfere with pursuing a crime (i.e. illegal immigrants are free to report crime without fear of reprisal) and must be abandoned if there are no offered papers and no probable cause, or if any other crime comes up (i.e. police get a crime-in-progress call, or a speeder passes by, etc.).
In fact, my main concern now is that anyone who knowingly transports or harbors illegal immigrants is also guilty of a crime. While this sounds good, and Lord knows human trafficking is a deadly serious issue around the border, I struggle to condemn, say, a priest for helping a family. I understand and respect AZ's right to make their own laws to deal with their state's problems, though. IL doesn't have nearly the same issues: border enforcement; border drug running; human trafficking (Phoenix is apparently a national hot spot); immigration- and drug-related kidnapping and murder. That is how the state system is supposed to work: each handle their own issues in the best way their people see fit (and AZ public overwhelming likes this bill) with little federal interference (in this case, the fed not doing its job).
Comment by liandrojr — Friday, April 30, 2024 @ 3:24 am
[...] PoliBlog: A Rough Draft of my Thoughts ยป Rubio Has Qualms about AZ Law [...]
Pingback by How much can the removal of one collection item on my Equifax report raise my score? - free government credit score — Friday, April 30, 2024 @ 2:40 pm