Federal judge blocks AZ immigration law

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton has blocked parts Arizona’s new immigration law, just one day before it is scheduled to take effect. Good for her.

“There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new [law]. … By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a ‘distinct, unusual and extraordinary’ burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose.”

Think about it. Let’s say you are a latino, legal resident or citizen, stopped for a traffic violation, and you don’t have your papers on you because, well, you don’t have any papers, because like most Americans, you don’t walk around carrying your passport. Under the AZ law, you could be arrested.

Perhaps that’s the kinda America that some people want to live in, but not me.

Comments

  1. 1

    Bluecollar Libertarian spews:

    Years ago I knew a guy named O’Brien. He had curly read hair. He was from Monterrey, Mexico. he was in the U.S. illegally. Guess no one would ever stop him and ask for his papers now would they?

  2. 2

    manoftruth spews:

    Think about it. Let’s say you are a latino, legal resident or citizen, stopped for a traffic violation, and you don’t have your papers on you because, well, you don’t have any papers, because like most Americans, you don’t walk around carrying your passport. Under the AZ law, you could be arrested.

    i admit i dont know much about that law, but if the above quote by you is 100 per accurate (and usually you misrepresent). then this is one time i agree with you. as an aside, are you also against dui checkpoints, which is also an enfringement on liberty?

  3. 3

    Rae spews:

    Yippee. I guess this means that when/if I get stopped, I can just say, I don’t have any ID (driver’s license, passport, whatever) and expect the cops to smile and say Have a good Day.

    Or maybe it means the feds will FINALLY get off their butts and start enforcing the law the AZ law was based on.

    I’m actually not going to count on either of the above scenarios happening.

  4. 4

    Odie Cologne spews:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....70662.html

    “Kobach helps draft proposed laws and, after they are adopted, trains officers to enforce them. If the laws are challenged, he goes to court to defend them.”
    Kobach helps states write the laws (which are sure to be legally challenged) and has written into the laws that he has the exclusive right to defend the states in the courts. He’s bankrupting Virginia with his ‘defenses’.
    Also, the privatized prisons have a new cash cow with this law.
    …………………………….:)

  5. 5

    rhp6033 spews:

    It seems that the governor who pushed this law has at least two people on her staff who are registered lobbyists for the private prison outfit that has the contract to incarcerate these people pending a hearing and/or deportation. Another staff member’s wife is also a lobbyist for the same company.

    The ICS has announced that they are already putting as many people through the hearing/deportation system as the system can handle, putting more people in the system will only put them in jail for increasingly longer periods of time while they wait for their hearing. Guess who’s paying the bill. And guess who gets the money.

  6. 6

    spews:

    I think I’m seeing a pattern here. Problems: Unemployment, crime, recession, culture war, foreigners talking funny language in grocery check out line, welfare, health care, high taxes. Cause: Mexicans (no differentiation as to citizenship)

    Until the early 70s there were lots of people in South Texas who didn’t know what their citizenship was. Born in Mexico of multi generational American parents. Spoke nothing but Spanish, as did most of their friends and family. I’m detecting a great degree of parallel between 2010 Arizona and 1934 Germany. Blame the others.

  7. 7

    Odie Cologne spews:

    re 5: This looks like a tax increase through the back door.

    Where’s the conservative outrage over being made chumps of yet again?

  8. 8

    Wunderlick spews:

    @1 You would be surprised how many people there are in Mexico with names like Smith, Johnson, Williams, etc.

  9. 10

    rhp6033 spews:

    I’ve always thought that the strongest argument against the Arizona immigration bill was the undue restriction it placed upon interstate commerce. It creates an environment where interstate travelors have to carry proof of citizenship in Arizona to avoid potential imprisonment that they don’t have to carry anywhere else.

  10. 11

    rhp6033 spews:

    # 8: Do you believe that U.S. citizens should also carry proof of citizenship?

    Because if you don’t, then an illegal alien will then just claim he’s a citizen, and he doesn’t need to provide you with any evidence to back that assertion.

  11. 12

    rhp6033 spews:

    Come to think of it, that’s a pretty good test of U.S. Citizenship:

    Policeman: “Show me your papers proving you are a citizen”.

    Citizen: “You can kiss my but, I don’t have to show you no stinking papers”.

    Policeman: “Okay, you pass the test, you can go now.”

  12. 13

    Rae spews:

    It’s going backwards: the illegals will continue to have more rights than those of us who were born here, or jumped through the hoops to become legal.

  13. 14

    Ekim spews:

    Years ago a guy from my high school was picked up by INS and shipped off to Mexico because he looked Hispanic and wasn’t carrying proof of citizenship. He thought it was funny. His parents were really pissed.

  14. 16

    CaughtInTheMiddle spews:

    Do you guys realize just how stupid you look trying to wrap this whole Arizona law thing up to look like American citizens will be harrassed just to fit your ideological proclivities…

  15. 17

    Moag spews:

    @12 Yes, please give examples. Name one legal right that an undocumented immigrant has that I (a natural-born citizen) don’t have. I sincerely want to know, so that I can right this terrible wrong done to all American citizens… by the American government… which was elected by, um… American citizens.

    Damn. Apparently, I took away my own rights without even realizing it.

  16. 18

    Rae spews:

    Here’s an example: If I run a red light, a cop need not be fearful that I will throw down the race/illegal immigrant card. I will produce my driver’s license and proof of insurance, and I will get a ticket.

    Now the same cop might refrain from even stopping someone who has the appearance of being illegal just because it will cause him/her more grief than not.

  17. 19

    Steve spews:

    “the appearance of being illegal”

    A cop knows before he pulls someone over whether or not they appear to be illegal?? Help me out here, Rae, just what is the “appearance of being illegal”?

    “throw down the race/illegal immigrant card”

    Huh?

  18. 21

    Rae spews:

    I didn’t coin the phrase “stopped due to driving while brown” which is thrown about often as an excuse why some are stopped more than others.

  19. 23

    Rae spews:

    @21 I’m saying that others accuse cops of pulling brown people over more. I, personally, don’t believe that…but libs on other forums I read say it all the time. And one of the arguments against the AZ law has been that cops will pull brown people over more than ever, just to ask them about their papers. I don’t believe that either. Just repeating what opponents have said.

  20. 24

    Steve spews:

    “I’m saying that others accuse cops of pulling brown people over more. I, personally, don’t believe that…”

    And yet you wrote this,

    “Now the same cop might refrain from even stopping someone who has the appearance of being illegal just because it will cause him/her more grief than not.”

    This isn’t making much sense, Rae.

  21. 25

    Rae spews:

    Some, who apparently favor illegal immigrants being allowed to run free here, say that the AZ law before the Judge went to work on it, would pull over people, just because they had darker skin than others. And the phrase “driving while brown” has been around long before that law ever written.

    What I am saying is that cops, being accused of pulling people over just because they are brown, might also refrain from pulling over a brownskinned person even if they were running a light to avoid being accused of racism.

    Me, on the other hand, they’ll pull me over…no problem, I’m not that brown, I would get a ticket.

    Sorry if you can’t follow this. I’m out.

  22. 26

    don spews:

    @24

    Oh but you don’t understand the full scope of the law. It’s not just cops pulling over drivers. The law allows any Arizona citizen to sue, for money, any city who that citizen feels is not doing enough to handle illegal immigrants. The law defines any contact by law enforcement as requiring action by the police to determine citizenship. So a citizen could sue a city if a police officer did not ask for citizenship papers from the guy working behind the counter at McDonald’s if he “suspects” that guy is illegal. And the lawyer at the heart of this, mentioned previously has nearly bankrupted a few small towns with this carpetbagger scheme. This is not about illegal immigration, it’s about lawyers making money from frivolous lawsuits.

  23. 28

    Bluecollar Libertarian spews:

    # 7 I am well aware that there are others in Mexico who have non Spanish surnames. It’s the politicians in this country who seem to be in the dark.

  24. 29

    czechsaaz spews:

    @2, yes. An it’s a good parallel.

    Despite the fact that court decisions have found checkpoints to be legal IMO checkpoints force people to stop for doing something legal (driving) with no mitigating offense that would cause reasonable suspicion that an individual was acting illegally. A parallel would be if officers stopped every fifth person walking down the street and forced them to empty their pockets to see if they are carrying contraband.

    As has been pointed out ad nauseum, if an individual is stopped on a traffic, or littering, or noise ordinance violation, etc.. it allows the officer to assume that by a: looking like an immigrant (not illegal) b: speaking English as a secondary language or not at all (not illegal), c: failing to carry papers (not illegal if you are a citizen) to be assumed involved in criminal behavior.

  25. 30

    Steve spews:

    Some, who apparently favor illegal immigrants being allowed to run free here, say that the AZ law before the Judge went to work on it, would pull over people, just because they had darker skin than others

    “Some say” Uh-huh. Sure thing, Rae. As you acknowledge, DWB has been around a very long time. Brown people already get pulled over. Now try to follow this – that’s not the point. It’s what would happen after they’ve been pulled over for DWB that is the issue.

  26. 31

    FricknFrack spews:

    I was in Phoenix having lunch with my Sis and our Hispanic (natural citizen) friend the day the AZ Gov signed the papers.

    Like I said “hey, I personally couldn’t prove my citizenship!” (birth certificate back in the safe in Seattle). Like my Sis pointed out, if they enacted this law in Washington State, we might expect a LOT of Caucasians be hauled off while they wait in tent jails.

    So many illegal Canadians in our midst, up here WHO would be automatically sensed to be “illegal”?

  27. 32

    Mark1 spews:

    Ah yes, the classic passing of the buck. I can’t say I blame Judge Susan Bolton for that. No worries. SCOTUS will make the ultimate decision. Better get your papers ready assholes! :)

    P.S. Sheriff Joe for President!!

  28. 34

    Puddybud is just another word for arschloch (asshole) spews:

    @32: Ask and ye shall receive:

    Fleeing Phoenix out of fear of immigration law

    As families leave the city, and state, some neighborhoods — already suffering from the weak economy — are left with fewer customers to sustain businesses.

    Here: http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....1019.story