Arizona signs immigration bill into law

[blackangst1]

Right but there's no good way to discern whether a person is or isn't by just looking at them (the 'reasonable suspicion' part). It's the same thing like that Cali case, seeing a hobo-looking guy in a nice neighborhood doesn't pass the reasonable suspicion part either.

Right but in the 24 states that do have stop and identify statutes, you dont need suspicion to...wait for it....stop and identify.

 

[halik]

[/I]



OK...and? Are we arguing the same thing here?

My point is that compelling someone to identify themselves and their immigration status because they "look Mexican" most likely won't pass the reasonable suspicion test (i.e. is unconstitutional).

 

[blackangst1]

My point is that compelling someone to identify themselves and their immigration status because they "look Mexican" most likely won't pass the reasonable suspicion test (i.e. is unconstitutional).

It sure will. Remember the wiki link about stop and identify?

 

[xj0hnx]

Right but there's no good way to discern whether a person is or isn't by just looking at them (the 'reasonable suspicion' part).

Which is why you ask to see ID, pretty simple really. Do you have a problem with the federal version of the law?

It's the same thing like that Cali case, seeing a hobo-looking guy in a nice neighborhood doesn't pass the reasonable suspicion part either.

I was watching some cops type show a few weeks ago. They pulled over two young black guys in the ghetto on a Friday night, and they had a bottle of liquor, and a handgun. They ran their IDs, nothing came back, they gave them their gun, and bottle back and sent them on their way. Point is, just because you get pulled over, or detained for a bit by the police, doesn't mean they are going to be violating your civil rights. Fact is that policemen job is to enforce the law, how exactly are they going to do that if they can't even ask someone for a fucking ID?

 

[halik]

Right but in the 24 states that do have stop and identify statutes, you dont need suspicion to...wait for it....stop and identify.

Ohhh i think i see your issue. The stop and identify laws in the states mean that if the cop has again a 'reasonable suspicion' he can require you to identify yourself.They do not grant police the right to require you to identify w/o any reason. The relevant part from wiki:

In the other states, you don't have to identify yourself when detained by police:

There is no federal law requiring that an individual identify herself during a Terry stop. Hiibel merely established that states and localities have the power to require people to identify themselves under those conditions.

The opinion in Hiibel implied that, unless a specific local jurisdiction (city, town, county, township, etc.) has passed a “stop and identify” law, persons in states not listed above are not obligated to identify themselves when detained by police.[18] However, the issue may not be settled absent a definitive state-court holding that identification is not required.[19] And the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU of Northern California caution:[20]

“And in any state, police do not always follow the law, and refusing to give your name may make them suspicious and lead to your arrest, so use your judgment. If you fear that your name may be incriminating, you can claim the right to remain silent, and if you are arrested, this may help you later.[21] Giving a false name could be a crime.”

My understanding of it as follows:

1. Cop can detain you if s/he has a reasonable suspicion of crime commited
2. If you live in the 23 states you have to identify yourself
3. if you do not live in the 23 states you don't have to give your name

 

[blackangst1]

Ohhh i think i see your issue. The stop and identify laws in the states mean that if the cop has again a 'reasonable suspicion' he can require you to identify yourself.They do not grant police the right to require you to identify w/o any reason. The relevant part from wiki:

In the other states, you don't have to identify yourself when detained by police:

Correct.

 

[halik]

Correct.

Alright, so we're on the same page. Cops do need reasonable suspicion to detain you and depending where you live can ask you to identify yourself. The reason why I speculate this will be unconstitutional is because "looking like an illegal" most likely won't pass the reasonable suspicion test.

It will also require local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are in the country illegally.

 

[halik]

Which is why you ask to see ID, pretty simple really. Do you have a problem with the federal version of the law?



I was watching some cops type show a few weeks ago. They pulled over two young black guys in the ghetto on a Friday night, and they had a bottle of liquor, and a handgun. They ran their IDs, nothing came back, they gave them their gun, and bottle back and sent them on their way. Point is, just because you get pulled over, or detained for a bit by the police, doesn't mean they are going to be violating your civil rights. Fact is that policemen job is to enforce the law, how exactly are they going to do that if they can't even ask someone for a fucking ID?

I do have a problem with it on any level if the cop doesn't need what SCOTUS sees as reasonable suspicion of a crime. That is you can't just walk up to tan dudes wearing sombreros and asking them for ID.

 

[blackangst1]

Alright, so we're on the same page. Cops do need reasonable suspicion to detain you and depending where you live can ask you to identify yourself. The reason why I speculate this will be unconstitutional is because "looking like an illegal" most likely won't pass the reasonable suspicion test.

Correct.

 

[Modelworks]

I personally don't have a problem with a cop walking up to me and asking to see an ID but I can understand why some may have issues with it.

I think what some are forgetting is police are people to. They do not want to spend their day stopping people and asking for an ID. They are not government agents out to arrest everyone like some 1984 movie storyline.

 

[Fern]

-snip-

Article 8, section 11-1051

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY

Looks like this new AZ is very similar to an existing federal program where local law enforcement works together with the feds to identify illegals and deal with them. This program was established under Bush and the Dems have been working to eliminate it. My county is enrolled in this program.

We now have a very large (Mexican) immigrant population in my area. A big problem with those who are illegal is proper identification. Since almost everyone arrested is released after arrest pending trial the illegals simply mis-identify themselves and avoid trial. They'll just assume a new identity and move to another county or state.

So, I think talk of 'stopping brown people' is misplaced. The way this program works is that only those arrested for something are questioned about immigration status. Police do not just stop anyone who looks 'brown' etc.

Notice the "lawful contact' requirement in the law.

Fern

 

[TechBoyJK]

There is an enormous difference here. The airline passengers are being screened because we already know where they come from. In the case of the AZ law, driving while brown, walking while brown, or just happening to walk past a cop who is in a pissy mood is grounds for screening. I know it shocks the hell out of folks but not all folks who look like Mexicans are from Mexico.

I'm sure cops are going to realize that arizona is a mexican border state, and probably has a large array of legal brown citizens. So it's NOT like looking for illegals will be like looking for a fly in milk. I'm sure many cops are brown themselves.

 

[blackangst1]

I personally don't have a problem with a cop walking up to me and asking to see an ID but I can understand why some may have issues with it.

I think what some are forgetting is police are people to. They do not want to spend their day stopping people and asking for an ID. They are not government agents out to arrest everyone like some 1984 movie storyline.

Im with you. But I dont get where people think this bill gives the cops reason to do so. Now mind you there are places where illegals are known to hang out looking for work. Theres nothing stopping the police from hanging around there also and enging in conversation with them (if they stick around that is). If suspicion arises, then they can ask for documentation (green card, whatever). That isnt profiling. Another example is...an area of downtown Phoenix is a known area for prostitution. There also happens to be a few top BBQ and Mexican food restaurants there. One night, after enjoying a rack of ribs, I was standing on the sidewalk enjoying a cig, and a cop approached me. He asked me what I was doing there, did I have business here, etc and took my ID. They were looking for johns. I dont have an issue with that (other than I think prostitution should be legal). Its not profiling at all.

I dont understand why people forget its a federal crime to be in this country without a visa or work permit, and why enforcement is such a big deal.

 

[blackangst1]

I'm sure cops are going to realize that arizona is a mexican border state, and probably has a large array of legal brown citizens. So it's NOT like looking for illegals will be like looking for a fly in milk. I'm sure many cops are brown themselves.

Absolutely. This bill does not bypass the need for probable cause.

 

[blackangst1]

Looks like this new AZ is very similar to an existing federal program where local law enforcement works together with the feds to identify illegals and deal with them. This program was established under Bush and the Dems have been working to eliminate it. My county is enrolled in this program.

We now have a very large (Mexican) immigrant population in my area. A big problem with those who are illegal is proper identification. Since almost everyone arrested is released after arrest pending trial the illegals simply mis-identify themselves and avoid trial. They'll just assume a new identity and move to another county or state.

So, I think talk of 'stopping brown people' is misplaced. The way this program works is that only those arrested for something are questioned about immigration status. Police do not just stop anyone who looks 'brown' etc.

Notice the "lawful contact' requirement in the law.

Fern

Understood

 

[Harvey]

Which is why you ask to see ID, pretty simple really. Do you have a problem with the federal version of the law?

Yeah. That worked well enough for Hitler's Gestapo and the Soviet KGB. No reason it wouldn't work here... as long as you're willing to abandon the Constitution's guarantee of freedom from unwarranted searches. :thumbsdown: :'(

 

[jpeyton]

This law is hilarious. Silly Republicans.

Illegal immigrants already break the law when they cross our border ILLEGALLY. That's why they're called illegal immigrants.

What does this law do? Make it even more illegal for them to be here? Do you think illegal immigrants care if they break one immigration law or ten immigration laws?

As long as there is work/money here for them, they will continue to cross our border.

 

[blackangst1]

This law is hilarious. Silly Republicans.

Illegal immigrants already break the law when they cross our border ILLEGALLY. That's why they're called illegal immigrants.

What does this law do? Make it even more illegal for them to be here? Do you think illegal immigrants care if they break one immigration law or ten immigration laws?

As long as there is work/money here for them, they will continue to cross our border.

Fail. This law is more about enforcement.

 

[blackangst1]

Yeah. That worked well enough for Hitler's Gestapo and the Soviet KGB. No reason it wouldn't work here... as long as you're willing to abandon the Constitution's guarantee of freedom from unwarranted searches. :thumbsdown: :'(

Fail also. Asking for ID, under suspicion, is not a search.

 

[Modelworks]

What does this law do?

I was watching an interview with an Arizona state trooper who said the biggest difference is before this law if they stopped someone they were not required to verify their immigration status, after the law they are required to. The difference before the law was there was about 60 people required to check status, after the law there are 300+ people required to check status.

 

[sportage]

What about a white guy driving alone in his car past an elementary school during school hours... Should we assume this is a child molester hunting for prey? I think every white guy alone driving in a car past an elementary school during school hours should always be stopped and questioned. "Why are you in this area? Why are you driving alone in your car past this area during school hours? You must be a child molester... out of the car buddy and hands on the roof !!".
Yeah.. let’s see just how long single white guys put up with that?
How about politicians...? We all know politicians are crooks... So why not stop AZ gov Jan Brewer EVERY DAY after she leaves the state capitol and frisk her for stolen state silverware. Check her pants... Strip search her. EVERY DAY! "Ok Jan... we KNOW you have stolen silverware on you person. Out of the car bitch... hands on the roof."

 

[Harvey]

Fail also. Asking for ID, under suspicion, is not a search.

It is, in fact, an unwarranted search, but I wouldn't expect anything but that response from right wingnut who supported the Bushwhackos' Gestapo wholesale shredding of the Constitutional rights of American citizens. :thumbsdown:

 

[Modelworks]

Yeah. That worked well enough for Hitler's Gestapo and the Soviet KGB. No reason it wouldn't work here... as long as you're willing to abandon the Constitution's guarantee of freedom from unwarranted searches. :thumbsdown: :'(

FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

How is requiring an officer to verify someones legal status when they have them stopped for speeding/shoplifting anything like randomly asking people for id ? Some may not be aware but officers often do not check peoples legal status even when they place them in jail. I know illegals who have gone to jail for things and are released and I know firsthand they are here illegally. It is a loophole in the system where you couldn't ask before because of not being PC or being accused of profiling.

 

[blackangst1]

It is, in fact, an unwarranted search, but I wouldn't expect anything but that response from right wingnut who supported the Bushwhackos' Gestapo wholesale shredding of the Constitutional rights of American citizens. :thumbsdown:

Asking for ID in a stop and identify state has already been proven constitutional by SCOTUS so go bark up another tree.

Dumbass.

 

[Modelworks]

What about a white guy driving alone in his car past an elementary school during school hours... Should we assume this is a child molester hunting for prey? I think every white guy alone driving in a car past an elementary school during school hours should always be stopped and questioned. "Why are you in this area? Why are you driving alone in your car past this area during school hours? You must be a child molester... out of the car buddy and hands on the roof !!".

Your missing the lawful contact part of the law. They cannot just stop someone because of this law , they have to have them already stopped for another reason, the media leaves that out because it doesn't make a good story if they include it.


In your example they cannot stop the white guy because he is near the school. But if he gets out and loiters on school property then they can ask him for id because he would be trespassing.