Arizona signs immigration bill into law

[Harvey]

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 ?

The Arizona law doesn't require waiting until someone is stopped for speeding or shoplifting, and it goes much further than demanding their ID. It gives officers the right to stop anyone they deem to be "suspicious" (under their own subjective terms) and demand that they prove their citizenship.

That's far more than "reasonable" suspicion of a crime. Have you ever walked outside and down the street without your wallet? How many people carry their birth certificates and passports with them at all times?

That is exactly what Hitler's Gestapo were doing when they asked to see peoples' papers.

That is exactly what Bush's goons were doing when they mined everyone's Internet traffic, regardless of whether they were American citizens or whether they had a warrant.

Sixty years ago, the turds who supported the Bushwhackos' tyrrany and bills like the Arizona statute would have made good, obedient, heel clicking little nazis. :thumbsdown:

Why do you hate the Constitution? :'(

 

[spidey07]

Without reasonable suspicion of a crime commited?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kolender_v._Lawson

The law states it has to be lawful contact with an officer like pulled over for speeding, etc. They can't just up and ask you to prove you're here legally.

 

[Modelworks]

The Arizona law doesn't require waiting until someone is stopped for speeding or shoplifting, and it goes much further than demanding their ID. It gives officers the right to stop anyone they deem to be "suspicious" (under their own subjective terms) and demand that they prove their citizenship.

It says "LAWFUL CONTACT". It does not give them the right to stop anyone just to check their id. Stop watching media reports and read the actual bill.

 

[Jaskalas]

A federal judge will simply attack this law in defense of the criminals.

 

[blackangst1]

The Arizona law doesn't require waiting until someone is stopped for speeding or shoplifting, and it goes much further than demanding their ID. It gives officers the right to stop anyone they deem to be "suspicious" (under their own subjective terms) and demand that they prove their citizenship.

Yes, it does. You obviously havent read the law. You cant stop someone who is brown/asian/whatever without reasonable suspicion. I know you love making phantom devils though.

Let me ask you something. Lets say youre a cop and your area is a known prostitution area. Lets say one night you see a group of girls, all dressed like the stereotypical prostitute, and one of them is obviously SE Asian. You pull up and talk to her. She speaks terrible english, and her answers to your general questions (are you OK, what are you doing here, etc...all legal questions) are vague at best. Lets say you work in a city known as a destination for human trafficking. Is it unconstitutional to ask for her legal status given those circumstances? We seem to get hung up on mexicans and cheap labor when in fact Pheonix is a major destination for human trafficking also. Because that scenario I gave happens 7 days a week, 365 days a year here.

But, whatever your answer, I see you havent gotten around to changing your cut/pastes to change Bush to Obama You might wanna get that done now that its been what...almost 2 years?

 

[blackangst1]

It says "LAWFUL CONTACT". It does not give them the right to stop anyone just to check their id. Stop watching media reports and read the actual bill.

Well, it IS Harvey we're talking about here.

But, in case he hasnt the whole thread, I'll repost the bill:

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

21 ​

​

​

​

OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS​

22 ​

​

​

​

STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS​

23 ​

​

​

​

UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,​

24 ​

​

​

​

WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE​

25 ​

​

​

​

PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT​

26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c)

Nothing unconstitutional about it at all. If illegal contact was made, then the rest is fruit from the poisonous tree.

 

[Patranus]

I carry my passport card on me. Here you go, I'll be on my merry way.

Don't need to carry your passport.

Not really sure how many adults don't carry around photo ID like a drivers license.

Not really sure what the deal is. If you get pulled over and you only have your Mexico ID card, well, you get a little more followup. You have a AZ drivers license, you are fine.

What is the big deal?

Then again, we can listen to the "progressives", harbor illegal aliens, and have them assassinate entire families like San Francisco.

 

[her209]

What happens if someone refuses to show I.D.?

 

[Modelworks]

What happens if someone refuses to show I.D.?

You would be arrested like always. Try refusing to show id in any state when stopped for speeding. They will arrest you for failing to comply with a lawful order.

 

[spidey07]

You would be arrested like always. Try refusing to show id in any state when stopped for speeding. They will arrest you for failing to comply with a lawful order.

Yep. Off to jail you go.

 

[boomerang]

The Arizona law doesn't require waiting until someone is stopped for speeding or shoplifting, and it goes much further than demanding their ID. It gives officers the right to stop anyone they deem to be "suspicious" (under their own subjective terms) and demand that they prove their citizenship.

That's far more than "reasonable" suspicion of a crime. Have you ever walked outside and down the street without your wallet? How many people carry their birth certificates and passports with them at all times?

That is exactly what Hitler's Gestapo were doing when they asked to see peoples' papers.

That is exactly what Bush's goons were doing when they mined everyone's Internet traffic, regardless of whether they were American citizens or whether they had a warrant.

Sixty years ago, the turds who supported the Bushwhackos' tyrrany and bills like the Arizona statute would have made good, obedient, heel clicking little nazis. :thumbsdown:

Do you feel illegal immigration is a problem? Do you feel it needs to be addressed? All this feigned outrage when we know full well you wish the country as a whole to take no action against those that break our laws and come here illegally.

Your wallet analogy is transparent. You know damned well illegals are not going to be carrying a passport - hello?. For uber liberal states that issue them drivers licenses, if they don't have it, they can tell the officer who can punch in their name and bring it up - with a picture.

My parents used to live in Sun City. The crime committed by illegals is in part what drove them out of the state and that was 12 years ago. I bet Police radios are going near constantly with descriptions of Hispanic males in regards to crime. Should the Police ignore those? Under what circumstances would you approve of the Police asking for ID?

Believe it or not, I'm not in disagreement with the potential for abuse along with the potential for this setting a bad precedent. However, the governor of Arizona has to accept the ultimate responsibility for protecting the citizens of her state. As I said in an earlier post, Arizona, and the nation as a whole has been waiting decades for a solution to this problem. In this case, how much longer should she wait? With the violence going on in Mexico spilling over the border on a regular basis, what is she to do?

 

[her209]

You would be arrested like always. Try refusing to show id in any state when stopped for speeding. They will arrest you for failing to comply with a lawful order.

What if you're the passenger? IIRC, the law makes it a felony for a citizen to transport an illegal immigrant. So I'm wondering how they determine that.

 

[Modelworks]

What if you're the passenger? IIRC, the law makes it a felony for a citizen to transport an illegal immigrant. So I'm wondering how they determine that.

That one is going to be hard to prove without infringing on a passengers rights. A passenger is not required to provide ID for things like a traffic stop, it is compared to asking a pedestrian for ID. It would need to be something like the driver is using a stolen car. They can ask a passenger for their name and you would be required to give it and if you give a false name you can be charged at a later date for that, but you can refuse to provide ID and there is nothing they can do.

The reason for asking for the name of the passengers is so they can add it to the report if you should challenge something the officer said and try to use the other passengers as witnesses on your behalf, they need something to show who was with you. Since you sign a copy of the report if you were to later be found that you knowingly transported an illegal they could charge you for that.

I have a quite a few members of law enforcement in the family so I know the rules pretty well. Don't forget that most cops just want to put in their hours and go home, the last thing they want to do is spend their time harassing someone, putting up with a bunch of stress and creating more work for themselves.

 

[halik]

The law states it has to be lawful contact with an officer like pulled over for speeding, etc. They can't just up and ask you to prove you're here legally.

It's gonna be interesting to see how it plays out according to the wiki:

As of January 2010, the validity of a law requiring that a person detained do anything more than state his name has not come before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Plus you still run into 5th amendment issues - you cannot require an illegal to disclose his illegal status w/o self incrimination.

 

[halik]

What happens if someone refuses to show I.D.?

What if you don't have an ID? Driving is a different story, since you have to have a driving license on you. The stop and identify clauses generally refer to your name, not a gov't id.

 

[spidey07]

It's gonna be interesting to see how it plays out according to the wiki

That's fine. As they are detained the police will attempt to determine if they're illegal or not and turn them over to the immigration.

 

[Double Trouble]

I find it absolutely amazing that people are dead-set against actually enforcing the laws of the country. Someone is here illegally, then damn it, boot them the hell out. The feds won't do it, so the state is doing it. I see no problem with that.

From what I understand, this is not a statute that basically says the cop can ask anyone any time to prove they are legal residents. That means much like other police stops etc, the officer has to have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has occurred (in this case, the crime is being here illegally). If the officer shows up in court and says "well, he looked mexican", that's not going to hold up. I'm curious to see what the standard is going to be that is needed for someone to get picked up.

I don't see any constitutional issues, but this will surely go to the federal courts and up the chain for the supremes to decide.

 

[halik]

That's fine. As they are detained the police will attempt to determine if they're illegal or not and turn them over to the immigration.

Yeah, but even that will be problematic. So you detain them for something and ask about legal status. Say they don't answer - you can't really get them for Obstruction, since the obvious defense would be 5th amendment / self incrimination.

 

[IronWing]

Don't need to carry your passport.

Not really sure how many adults don't carry around photo ID like a drivers license.

A drivers' license is not proof of legal residency or citizenship. How many folks other than Spidey do you know who carry their certified birth certificates or passports with them at all times?

The "lawful contact" clause doesn't provide any shield against arbitrary demands for proof of legal status. This law makes being in Arizona as an illegal alien criminal trespass under state law. All an officer has to do to assert a lawful contact is to claim suspicion of a violation of this very same law. Neat huh? We're back to arbitrary contact and arbitrary arrest. Functionally, this law turns the entire state into a "restricted area" akin to a military base or other restricted government facility where persons can be stopped and questioned simply for being here. Those who can not provide affirmative evidence of their lawful presence in Arizona are subject to arrest. Folks may be released later when such proof is provided but that does not lessen the utility of this law as a tool of state intimidation and state harassment.

 

[bob4432]

That one is going to be hard to prove without infringing on a passengers rights. A passenger is not required to provide ID for things like a traffic stop, it is compared to asking a pedestrian for ID. It would need to be something like the driver is using a stolen car. They can ask a passenger for their name and you would be required to give it and if you give a false name you can be charged at a later date for that, but you can refuse to provide ID and there is nothing they can do.

The reason for asking for the name of the passengers is so they can add it to the report if you should challenge something the officer said and try to use the other passengers as witnesses on your behalf, they need something to show who was with you. Since you sign a copy of the report if you were to later be found that you knowingly transported an illegal they could charge you for that.

I have a quite a few members of law enforcement in the family so I know the rules pretty well. Don't forget that most cops just want to put in their hours and go home, the last thing they want to do is spend their time harassing someone, putting up with a bunch of stress and creating more work for themselves.

last time my wife and i got pulled over she was driving, cop didn't even acknowledge me being in the vehicle, at the time of the stop or in the report.

 

[spidey07]

Yeah, but even that will be problematic. So you detain them for something and ask about legal status. Say they don't answer - you can't really get them for Obstruction, since the obvious defense would be 5th amendment / self incrimination.

This is more about a state forcing the federal government to do what it is supposed to do. I'm very happy at Arizona giving the obama administration a big FUCK YOU.

 

[Double Trouble]

A passenger is not required to provide ID for things like a traffic stop, it is compared to asking a pedestrian for ID. It would need to be something like the driver is using a stolen car. They can ask a passenger for their name and you would be required to give it and if you give a false name you can be charged at a later date for that, but you can refuse to provide ID and there is nothing they can do.

People make these kind of broad assertions as if the laws and regs are the same everywhere. They are not. What the officer can and can't do depends in large part on the local laws and ordinances. Not saying that you're not right (I don't know), just saying be careful making such assumptions about other states/localities etc.

 

[IronWing]

This is more about a state forcing the federal government to do what it is supposed to do. I'm very happy at Arizona giving the obama administration a big FUCK YOU.

Particularly when it doesn't affect you personally. Some of us are going to have to live with this bullshit.

 

[bob4432]

A drivers' license is not proof of legal residency or citizenship. How many folks other than Spidey do you know who carry their certified birth certificates or passports with them at all times?

The "lawful contact" clause doesn't provide any shield against arbitrary demands for proof of legal status. This law makes being in Arizona as an illegal alien criminal trespass under state law. All an officer has to do to assert a lawful contact is to claim suspicion of a violation of this very same law. Neat huh? We're back to arbitrary contact and arbitrary arrest. Functionally, this law turns the entire state into a "restricted area" akin to a military base or other restricted government facility where persons can be stopped and questioned simply for being here. Those who can not provide affirmative evidence of their lawful presence in Arizona are subject to arrest. Folks may be released later when such proof is provided but that does not lessen the utility of this law as a tool of state intimidation and state harassment.

most of the time, unless i am driving, i never carry id or even a wallet. will let you know when i get arrested.

as far as the law, cop pulls you over, you have no id or dl, or say you do - vehicle registration - no? insurance card - no? kind of starts to not look good for you which it wouldn't for anybody.

 

[Carmen813]

What's your solution?

Stop wasting our troops protecting other countries borders and redeploy them to protect our own. You know, it's sort of the whole point of the Department of Defense.

I question the Constitutionality of this law. Illegal immigration is a major problem, but this potential repercussions of this bill are quite stunning. Nice to see how small government this forums Conservatives really are

I also wonder how they are going to pay for this. Probably just raise taxes.