Quantcast

obama admin to sue AZ over immigration law

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
Clinton comment on immigration law riles Ariz. gov
PHOENIX -- Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer said Thursday she's angry over comments by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that the Obama administration will sue the state over its new immigration law.

In a June 8 media interview in Ecuador that began circulating Thursday in the U.S., Clinton said President Barack Obama thinks the federal government should determine immigration policy and that the Justice Department "will be bringing a lawsuit against the act."

Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler on Thursday declined to say whether the department would sue and that "the department continues to review the law."

The department has been looking at the law for weeks for possible civil rights violations, with an eye toward a possible court challenge.
well, you can write off AZ as a red state for the next generation
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
I think the Dems showy standing up for Latino causes may help them. The old white people are a dying breed...
i wasn't aware that turning a blind eye to unlawful behavior or trampling on states' rights was a "latino cause"

and it's not just old white people who are opposed to this, hispanics who emigrated here legally are put out as well
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,214
16
Blindly running into cactus
I think the Dems showy standing up for Latino causes may help them. The old white people are a dying breed...
apparently, 7 in 10 americans are old white people :rolleyes:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/04/29/Poll-Most-support-Arizona-immigration-law/UPI-55921272544207/
NEW YORK, April 29 (UPI) -- Seven in 10 U.S. adults support arresting people who can't prove they're in the United States legally, a poll about Arizona's new immigration law
indicated.
 

Toshi

Harbinger of Doom
Oct 23, 2001
29,553
3,016
Poll results just indicate how the question was posed. Ask it as "would you support a law that leads to increased mistrust between the public and law enforcement?" and you'd get a different result.
 

X3pilot

Texans fan - LOL
Aug 13, 2007
5,861
1
SoMD
i wasn't aware that turning a blind eye to unlawful behavior or trampling on states' rights was a "latino cause"

and it's not just old white people who are opposed to this, hispanics who emigrated here legally are put out as well
Asking this question as an honest to goodness inquiry..wouldn't the states' right to protect it's borders or enforce them or whatever only apply to 3 of AZ's borders, considering one of them is the federal border, therefore making it federal jurisdiction and responsibility?
 

the desmondo

Monkey
Mar 7, 2007
250
0
As far as I'm concerned, this is merely a divide-and-rule tactic designed to get liberals and conservatives fighting again over immigration, so that neither side fully realizes that the ruling-class oligarchs pulling Obama's strings are literally waging economic war against everyone -- regardless of race, religion, ideology, or party affiliation.

 

jonKranked

Press Button, Receive Stupid
Nov 10, 2005
62,619
8,765
media blackout
As far as I'm concerned, this is merely a divide-and-rule tactic designed to get liberals and conservatives fighting again over immigration, so that neither side fully realizes that the ruling-class oligarchs pulling Obama's strings are literally waging economic war against everyone -- regardless of race, religion, ideology, or party affiliation.

 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
Asking this question as an honest to goodness inquiry..wouldn't the states' right to protect it's borders or enforce them or whatever only apply to 3 of AZ's borders, considering one of them is the federal border, therefore making it federal jurisdiction and responsibility?
back to this:

nytimes said:
The Obama administration has not always been completely clear about its immigration agenda, but it was forthright Tuesday when it challenged the pernicious Arizona law that allows the police to question the immigration status of people they detain for local violations. Only the federal government can set or enforce immigration policy, the government said in its lawsuit against the state, and "Arizona has crossed this constitutional line."

There is nothing terribly complicated about this principle, which is based on several aspects of the Constitution, acts of Congress, and Supreme Court decisions over the years. A patchwork of state and local immigration policies would cause havoc.
fair enough.
but how does this go unnoticed?
boston globe said:
From Woonsocket to Westerly, the troopers patrolling the nation's smallest state are reporting all illegal immigrants they encounter, even on routine stops such as speeding, to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE.

"There are police chiefs throughout New England who hide from the issue . . . and I'm not hiding from it,'' said Colonel Brendan P. Doherty, the towering commander of the Rhode Island State Police. "I would feel that I'm derelict in my duties to look the other way.''

Rhode Island's collaboration with federal immigration authorities is controversial; critics say the practice increases racial profiling and makes immigrants afraid to help police solve crimes.

But it is a practice that Governor Deval Patrick's opponents in the governor's race are urging Massachusetts to revive. The Patrick administration has staunchly opposed having state troopers enforce immigration laws.
does this not effectively create that which the fed'l gov't complains against?

furthermore, why aren't sanctuary cities victim of suits from the fed'l gov't? they are violating fed'l law by definition, and have created a de-facto patchwork of immigration law.
 

manimal

Ociffer Tackleberry
Feb 27, 2002
7,214
16
Blindly running into cactus
Rhode Island's collaboration with federal immigration authorities is controversial; critics say the practice increases racial profiling and makes immigrants afraid to help police solve crimes.
heck, we call ICE on any violent crime involving a suspected IA...just standard operating procedure here.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,638
4
SF, CA
but how does this go unnoticed?does this not effectively create that which the fed'l gov't complains against?
there is no new legislation in place, that is just how RI is choosing to enforce the existing laws.

Arizona police already have the ability to do the same at their discretion. The problem is this law trumps discretion and makes such action a requirement.

furthermore, why aren't sanctuary cities victim of suits from the fed'l gov't? they are violating fed'l law by definition, and have created a de-facto patchwork of immigration law.
Agreed that it's at odds with stated policies. I'd say that's the case for political, not legal reasons. Even Bush wasn't going to take on SF.
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,356
918
East Bay, Cali
The injunction also applies to a provision of the law that would effectively waive the need for an arrest warrant in cases where a suspect is believed to be an illegal immigrant who has committed a crime that could lead to deportation. In such cases, probable cause would have become a sufficient standard for making an arrest.
I was unaware of this portion of the AZ law. So essentially if you look Hispanic or speak poor English cops don't need an arrest warrant. Seems pretty shady to me.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
I was unaware of this portion of the AZ law. So essentially if you look Hispanic or speak poor English cops don't need an arrest warrant. Seems pretty shady to me.
speaking poor english is necessary, but not sufficient.

add to that committing a deportable crime is, then you have the trifecta sombrero-trick triple play lotto ticket

it would be shady if it were illiterate browns only
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,356
918
East Bay, Cali
it would be shady if it were illiterate browns only
I'm sorry but leaving it to cops to figure out, on the spot, who is an illegal and who isn't seems like a bad idea. Lots of room for abuse (and mistakes) here.

By the way which other demographics do you think police will be applying this law?
 
Last edited:

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
I'm sorry but leaving it to cops to figure out, on the spot, who is an illegal and who isn't seems like a bad idea. Lots of room for abuse here.
i could be mistaken, but i believe burden of proof rests at the workboots of the mojados

and again, being brown isn't a crime for which they'd be deported, even if sheriff joe tries to. deportation is fed'l, and they'd have to take custody from the state, which they wouldn't without checking the boxes of:
- lack of proof of citizenship
- deportable criminal activity (e.g., much more than just j-walking)

of course, this is just a part of their due process. to throw them over the fence w/o it is a vdare wet dream
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,356
918
East Bay, Cali
I think we may have different interpretations of how this part of the law would be enforced. To me the phrase:

in cases where a suspect is believed to be an illegal immigrant who has committed a crime that could lead to deportation
Is much to vague. Sounds like an officer could arrest a US citizen or legal immigrant just because they look like someone reported to have committed a crime.

So Juan, a documented immigrant, could easily be arrested with no evidence of any wrong doing. An officer would just have to mistake him for someone else and if Juan doesn't have all his papers on him, its off to the pokey.

I haven't read the actual text so I may be way off base.
 

Silver

find me a tampon
Jul 20, 2002
10,846
0
Orange County, CA
What would happen is that brown citizens will end up sitting in handcuffs while family digs up their birth certificate, and a white immigrant like myself will never get checked.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
even more confusing in its unintended application is this stmt by judge bolton:
Requiring Arizona law enforcement officials and agencies to determine the immigration status of every person who is arrested burdens lawfully-present aliens because their liberty will be restricted while their status is checked
regarding a traffic stop: if we ever got stopped & was asked for papers, would not that same burden befall us? if so (it is so), shall there now be rights allotted to & enjoyed by non-citizens?

common sense says 'no'.
the 'law' says 'yes'
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
5
What would happen is that brown citizens will end up sitting in handcuffs while family digs up their birth certificate, and a white immigrant like myself will never get checked.
a subtle manuel labor shot? nice.