Did you know that the new Arizona Immigration Law has a “Get Out of Immigration Trouble Card” included in it?  Yep.  It is right there in the third paragraph of the Bill.  Unfortunately the opponents of the Bill are to busy criticizing it to bother with reading it (let alone reading the correct version – Hint: It’s the House version and not the first copy that pops up on a Google Search for SB 1070 which is the Senate Version).

For those too busy here is the paragraph that lays it ALL out with the important words highlighted in BOLD.  Section 2, Paragraph B

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR A LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY OF 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, EXCEPT IF THE DETERMINATION MAY HINDER OR OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION. ANY PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED. THE PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE MAY NOT SOLELY CONSIDER RACE, COLOR OR NATIONAL ORIGIN IN IMPLEMENTING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE UNITED STATES OR ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. A PERSON IS PRESUMED TO NOT BE AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES IF THE PERSON PROVIDES TO THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER OR AGENCY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:

What does this mean you ask?

The 4th Amendment to the Constitution protects us (and an illegal Immigrant) from “unreasonable search and seizure”

unreasonable search and seizure n. search of an individual or his/her premises (including an automobile) and/or seizure of evidence found in such a search by a law enforcement officer without a search warrant and without “probable cause” to believe evidence of a crime is present. Such a search and/or seizure is unconstitutional under the 4th Amendment (applied to the states by the 14th Amendment), and evidence obtained thereby may not be introduced in court

This law allows for a “reasonable suspicion” standard

Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard in United States law that a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity based on specific and articulable facts and inferences. It is the basis for an investigatory or Terry stop by the police and requires less evidence than probable cause, the legal requirement for arrests and warrants. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the “reasonable person” or “reasonable officer” standard, in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably believe a person has been, is, or is about to be, engaged in criminal activity; such suspicion is not a mere hunch. Police may also, based solely on reasonable suspicion of a threat to safety, frisk a suspect for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. A combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous, can form the basis of reasonable suspicion

Precedent

In Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled that a person can be stopped and frisked by a police officer based on a reasonable suspicion. Such a detention does not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizure. In Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada the court further established that a state may require, by law, that a person identify himself or herself to an officer during a stop. An arrest is not permitted based on reasonable suspicion; probable cause is required for an arrest. Further, a person is not required to answer any other questions during a Terry stop, and the detention must be brief.

But then the law is even further restrictive on the Officer.  The “Reasonable Suspicion” standard established by the Supreme Court already mandated that the time that you are confronted by an Officer must be “brief”.  If you are pulled over by an Officer  for cause (tail light out, speeding, illegal lane change, etc…) and he develops a “Reasonable Suspicion” during his interaction with you “might be illegal” (no drivers license, no insurance, barely speak English, evasive, Van full of people who’s names you as the driver don’t know, etc…) he must make an attempt to determine your immigration status.  However, that is tempered by the very next phrase “WHEN PRACTICABLE”.  If it’s along I-10, I-17, US 60, etc… through the heart of Phoenix at Rush Hour it’s probably not “Practicable” to be spending the amount of time it will take to contact the Feds to determine your Immigration Status.

Some really dishonest opponents say that the Police could pull you over or accost you simply because your Brown and traveling in a group and that therefore you must be illegal’s.  Note the line bolded above that says that race, color, etc… MAY NOT be a reason.

But you say where is this miracle “Get Out of Immigration Trouble Card”.  See the line that says “EXCEPT IF THE DETERMINATION MAY HINDER OR OBSTRUCT AN INVESTIGATION”.  There ya go!  If you are a witness or a victim of a crime the Police are instructed to NOT spend any time examining your immigration status.

The vaunted Community Organizers to the illegal alien population (well, vaunted at least since President Obama rose from their ranks – community organizer that is and not illegal alien.  I, like President Obama was born in Hawaii) should be shouting these facts from the rooftops in their Communities.  If your a victim or a witness help the Police with their investigation and they won’t bother you.

I look at those that want the cheap labor from Mexico as being enablers to the real criminals in the immigration farce.  They are just looking to continue the exploitation of those poor people that their own country with all of it’s tremendous resources – Ports on both the Pacific and Atlantic (by way of the Caribbean), extensive natural resources (oil, agriculture) has abandoned in favor of supporting drug dealers and human smugglers and lining their own corrupt kleptomaniac pockets as they continue to loot that country.

This “cheap” labor is just one more exploration of those poor people since their labor generates Mexico’s second largest source of hard currency when they send their money back to their poor families in that hell hole that Spring breakers go to party in.

There is a huge demand when we are at full employment and then it’s easy to look the other way as those people are exploted for others benefit.

In also allows American business to keep wages artificially low thereby by their use of that illegal labor.

Put that visual in your mind next time you think that Amnesty is about helping those that are down.  Want to help them?  Help them take back their own country so that they can provide for their families without being our indentured servants.

Does the current immigration system need to be fixed.  Sure.  Is opening the borders the answer?  I don’t think so.  We would probably see a number of countries depopulated if we did that.  Currently “legal” immigration allows for almost 1 million per year to obtain residency.

I’m not “opposed” to Amnesty.  I just don’t want to see repeat of 1986 where the weak politicians say amnesty now and will do enforcement later.  The amnesty did happen but as usual the Politicians kicked the can down the road and the enforcement. Well, they never got around to it.

Close the damn door to ILLEGAL immigration, liberalize the immigration quotas and THEN we can talk about Amnesty.  I was at a clients office today.  He is a very prominent Immigration Attorney here in Phoenix.  While he is decidedly not happy about 1070 he did say it will do what it’s drafters intended.  Attrition Through Enforcement.  That concept will result in there needing to be few amnesties handed out.

Arizona has already seen a huge decline in the illegal population to do the stepped up immigration sweeps and the downturn in the economy.  Many have returned to Mexico as well as moved to other surrounding states.

The idea of the “white mans burden” is so 19th Century.  I guess the Democrats are still pursuing their goal of Manifest Destiny.  Last seen when that party was pursuing a war with what Country?  Oh that’s right Mexico.

The more things change…

Since useless Washington Politians WON’T even begin to address the issues and costs borne by Arizona tax payers due to their inaction AND the fact that some Cities in Arizona have turned a blind eye to illegal immigrants estabilishing defacto “sancturay cities” the State was left with the option of picking up that slack.
I would like to see a Guest Worker program.  But one not suseptible to the problems of the old Bracero system that resulted in abuses of those migrant workers.  A functioning guest worker program would provide jobs for migrant workers that “Americans” won’t do but would still allow for those workers to freely move back and forth across the border so that they don’t feel forced to smuggle themselves and their familes across.
It would also reduce the business model for the Coyotes who kidnap, rape and really abuse the illiegal immigrant.
Washington Pols have wanted to do the same thing they did in 1986.  That is, provide Amnesty to those here now with some nebulus promise of border enforcement later.  Problem is that while later comes the enforcement never follows.  This is the standrd MO for a politian.  Do the easy thing today and promise to do the heavy lifiting later.  Sorry, I’m not buying that soap.
Those Pols don’t want to fix the problem because the illegal working on someone elses SSN (resturant, farm, construction, etc…) is paying into the SSN system through withhldings but will never collect.  It’s found money for Washington.
Attrition through enforcement does work.  Dry up the jobs and the illegals leave.  We are seeing that here in the state right now through the downturn in the ecomomy.
Mexico is pissed because the export of their underclass to work here in the US is the second largest source of revenue to the country (behind Oil) and it means that Mexico does not have to produce jobs for them.
I’m no fan of either JD Hayworth or Russell Pearce.  I also can’t stand John McCain.  But to say that this new law is all about racial profiling is just wrong.  For the Police to ask about your immigration status they have to have a reasonable suspicion.  Just seeing someone walking down the street while being “brown” is not reasonable.  Today if an illegal is picked up the Police can’t ask.  So they cite and release.  The illegal of course never shows up in court.  Being able to ask – if they have a reasonable suspicion would allow them to now detain and hand the illegal over to ICE.
Here is an old article from the Center for Immigrant Studies that outlines how Attrition through enforcement works.
http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back406.html
I’ve worked overseas on a visa so I know what it means to have gone through the proper channels to work in a country legally – even if some of the things I was doing was illegal.  A proper functioning system would also help address the issues expressed by those native born Americans of Hispanic background who say they will be “profiled”