• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The AZ Immigration Law Has Been Decided

At least police can still verify the legal status of those they pull over for traffic offense.

I understand why this was upheld owing to the basis on which it was challenged. It will have to go into effect in order to be challenged fully, so I won't argue the merits of the ruling today.

I have a huge problem with this:
That provision, requiring police to conduct immigration checks on individuals they arrest or merely stop for questioning whom they suspect are in the U.S. illegally,

Read more: Arizona immigration ruling: High court strikes down much of Arizona immigration law - POLITICO.com

So my Hispanic looking relatives, who were born here, can be harassed for doing nothing more than looking Hispanic. That's a barnyard substance.
 
If you REALLY wanted to end the "cheap foreign labor" profits you would CUT all federal aid to the states for illegal aliens. The federal gov't MANDATES that the states educate (the children of) illegal aliens and pays them to do it while it leaves the border open. Stop that education aid and the states would help turn off the jobs magnet as they would then bear these HUGE costs. As long as the federal gov't bears the costs and the state gets the benefits, illegal immigration will never end. The illegal immigration magnet is FEDERALLY subsidized, making it not a state cost.

Stopping education aid does nothing about the job magnet. Yanking employer licenses would.
 
I understand why this was upheld owing to the basis on which it was challenged. It will have to go into effect in order to be challenged fully, so I won't argue the merits of the ruling today.

I have a huge problem with this:


Read more: Arizona immigration ruling: High court strikes down much of Arizona immigration law - POLITICO.com

So my Hispanic looking relatives, who were born here, can be harassed for doing nothing more than looking Hispanic. That's a barnyard substance.

So a cop asking for a white's driver's license is harassment? cool
 
Stopping education aid does nothing about the job magnet. Yanking employer licenses would.

The DOJ objects to that. They tried to block the provision of the law going after employers.
 
Which means it's useless.

AZ Republican Senators and governor knew this would happen, they want to keep their cheap foreign labor profits flowing into their pockets.

Well you know the Governor gets 10% right off the top, right? :roll:
 
The DOJ objects to that. They tried to block the provision of the law going after employers.

They can object all they want, state business licenses is state business; USC wants to play the jurisdiction game, fine.
 
Last edited:
I understand why this was upheld owing to the basis on which it was challenged. It will have to go into effect in order to be challenged fully, so I won't argue the merits of the ruling today.

I have a huge problem with this:


Read more: Arizona immigration ruling: High court strikes down much of Arizona immigration law - POLITICO.com

So my Hispanic looking relatives, who were born here, can be harassed for doing nothing more than looking Hispanic. That's a barnyard substance.

They can check other things if they stop you, so how do you have a problem with this?
 
All you really need is #3.


That would only take care of the ones looking for work. But what about the ones here to pop out anchor babies and those wishing to exploit the system in order to get their kids in school and get tax payer funded services?
 
So a cop asking for a white's driver's license is harassment? cool

That has nothing to do with it, they are being stopped and questioned because they are suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.

That provision, requiring police to conduct immigration checks on individuals they arrest or merely stop for questioning whom they suspect are in the U.S. illegally,

That stop is made based on how they look, yes? A white driver won't be stopped under these circumstances, or at least it's highly unlikely.
 
They can check other things if they stop you, so how do you have a problem with this?

If they legitimately stop someone for doing something suspicious, they don't need this law.

This law says the police can stop them merely for suspecting they are in the country illegally.
 
At least police can still verify the legal status of those they pull over for traffic offense.Hopefully Arizona goes back to the drawing board for other ideas on cracking down on illegal immigration. I would like to see these ideas implemented.

1.Mandate E-verify.

There are apparently some flaws with E-verify. We had a guy working for my company who passed E-verify and several job-specific background checks (one of them even included finger printing). We had to terminate him and he applied for unemployment. Based on the investigation of our claims and the state's investigation of the employee, it was determined that our reasons were valid and, even if they weren't, he didn't qualify for unemployment because he did not have legal residency status.

Makes me wonder how he passed E-verify and all those background checks without flagging the system, yet the state was somehow able to make the determination on his work status.
 
odd slant on why the AZ politicians pushed the immigration law... I agree they knew there was a good chance it would be shot down, or at least have it's teeth pulled...

But not to keep 'slave labor'- rather they were pandering to the 'nativists' who fear losing majority rule by skin color and think that equates to losing freedom. :roll:

The teeth have been removed from the only remaining part... a cop can ask, can see, but can only call ICE, there is no state crime to enforce.

A hollow victory at best.
 
If they legitimately stop someone for doing something suspicious, they don't need this law.

This law says the police can stop them merely for suspecting they are in the country illegally.

If you're an Arizona cop, how many latinos do you deal with on a daily basis? How many Arizona cops are latino? Ultimately there is and must be some discretion left to the police officers. And this already exists for other aspects of law. If I'm fishing on a river, the game warden has a right to ask for my fishing license. So when I show him, is it okay for me to charge the warden with harrassment or profiling?
 
There are apparently some flaws with E-verify. We had a guy working for my company who passed E-verify and several job-specific background checks (one of them even included finger printing). We had to terminate him and he applied for unemployment. Based on the investigation of our claims and the state's investigation of the employee, it was determined that our reasons were valid and, even if they weren't, he didn't qualify for unemployment because he did not have legal residency status.

Makes me wonder how he passed E-verify and all those background checks without flagging the system, yet the state was somehow able to make the determination on his work status.

So we improve upon e-verify, right?
 
So the fed owns immigration .. no surprise there.

And sadly, what with Multi-Cultural Internationalists on the left and Corporate Global Expansionists on the right running everything in Washington, no suprise that the 20 million job-stealing illegals won't be going anywhere soon, to the detriment of jobs-recovery for American citizens.

But it looks like the state gets to sus out the perps.

That's a fair bone, perhaps.

Stop, release, and report isn't a very powerful performance, though, and hopefully illegals won't get "taught" that the state has no power and is meaningless in the matter. They already think common ordinary American citizens are meaningless. Really don't want to add another American agency to their list of scoffables.

So what's a reasonable cause to stop someone suspected of breaking immigration law?

Well, what are the requirements for legal immigration status? Some degree of English-language proficiency? Thus if the police see people conversing in other than English and ask them a normal question with the use of considerably germane English terms and they respond with a complete lack of understanding, then it's "May I see your papers?" time followed by "See you later".

If nothing else, this AZ matter has brought attention to the problem that the great majority of Americans would like to see solved by the trespassing, identity-forging, and job-stealing illegals leaving the country.

Thus when the candidates start trotting out their social-issue motivations to get consitutuents to the polls to vote for their power-holding economic policies -- like Obama's egregious manipulation "the poor little baby kids that were brought here when they were young twenty years ago, they should be made citizens now" -- maybe, just maybe, savvy Americans will vote for the lesser of the two evils.

Or, better yet, just say "No!" to both wings that are killing America and start an American Citizens party at the center of the political spectrum where the philosophy is both liberty and justice for all American citizens ..

.. Which would come complete with a 50-year restroactive modification of citizenship laws that require previous legal immigration status.
 
If you're an Arizona cop, how many latinos do you deal with on a daily basis? How many Arizona cops are latino? Ultimately there is and must be some discretion left to the police officers. And this already exists for other aspects of law. If I'm fishing on a river, the game warden has a right to ask for my fishing license. So when I show him, is it okay for me to charge the warden with harrassment or profiling?

Of course it's not profiling. You're fishing, you need to have a license.

My Hispanic looking relatives could be doing anything, walking or driving down a street for instance, and be stopped and harassed for merely being suspected of being illegal. As a white person, I don't have to worry about that. That's profiling.

A real world example: My blue-eyed, blonde haired relative is married to an American born woman of Mexican heritage. They have two children. One is blue-eyed and white, the other is brown eyed and brunette. He could be out with his daughter and have no worries. She could be out with their son and potentially be stopped. They live in Arizona, so my concerns are very real, this could effect her and their child.
 
Last edited:
So we improve upon e-verify, right?

Honestly, I'm not sure what the issue was that allowed him to pass so many checks prior to unemployment rejection. We've run into a variety of scenarios (we have offices in Texas and Arizona), and I'm not exactly sure what could be done with E-Verify to correct the problems. My understanding is that E-Verify simply checks the SSN and confirms that it matches the name provided, then issues an all-clear if there are no flags on that number. But it's missing double employment and address discrepancies.

On one hand, that sounds easily fixed. On the other hand, it's kind of terrifying to think we'd all have to be tracked that heavily by the fed just to ensure that 12 million people aren't working illegally.
 
There are apparently some flaws with E-verify. We had a guy working for my company who passed E-verify and several job-specific background checks (one of them even included finger printing). We had to terminate him and he applied for unemployment. Based on the investigation of our claims and the state's investigation of the employee, it was determined that our reasons were valid and, even if they weren't, he didn't qualify for unemployment because he did not have legal residency status.

Makes me wonder how he passed E-verify and all those background checks without flagging the system, yet the state was somehow able to make the determination on his work status.


Maybe the state checked other things like his ID and other information.
 
So we improve upon e-verify, right?

it should be federal law that ANYONE who gets a job in the USA have their right-to-work status verified. companies or govt. agencies that fail to do this should be penalized severely.
 
Maybe the state checked other things like his ID and other information.

Not sure what the state does, but he passed a background check for one of our customers that involved his SSN, his DL #, his last 15 years worth of mailing addresses, his entire educational career, 3 references, and finger printing. Whatever the state runs must be infinitely more invasive (and therefore probably more costly).
 
Supreme Court nixes parts of Ariz. immigration law

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down three portions of Arizona's controversial immigration law on Monday, but allowed one of the key provisions to stand in a highly anticipated split decision.

The justices ruled that Arizona overstepped its authority by creating state crimes targeting illegal immigrants. One provision made it a state crime for illegal immigrants not to carry registration papers and another created a crime for soliciting work. The third portion of the law struck down allowed state and local police to arrest illegal immigrants without a warrant in some cases.


High court rejects parts of Ariz. immigration law
 
Of course it's not profiling. You're fishing, you need to have a license.

My Hispanic looking relatives could be doing anything, walking or driving down a street for instance, and be stopped and harassed for merely being suspected of being illegal. As a white person, I don't have to worry about that. That's profiling.
Maybe it is profiling .. in this case, target/suspect/pepetrator profiling.

Law enforcement does it all the time. It's not illegal.

"Give me a description of the perps, Lieutenant."

"Well, they're of any race, though mostly Latino down here, exhibiting a tendency for speaking other than English, unfamiliar with our traffic laws, over-crowding vehicles and not using safety belts, and they can be found loitering in front of Home Depot and major thoroughfares in warehouse districts ... if you see anyone suspicious, detain and interrogate -- the perps have commited crimes -- tespassing, identity-forging, and job-stealing -- and they're criminals that musts be brought to justice in the name of American citizens."

"White" American citizens only have themseves to blame now for condoning the illegal immigration injustice against their fellow American citizens.

Problems that linger too long without a solution only get worse .. until sometimes more "extreme" measures are needed once a decision is made to finally solve the problem.
 
That has nothing to do with it, they are being stopped and questioned because they are suspected of being in the U.S. illegally.



That stop is made based on how they look, yes? A white driver won't be stopped under these circumstances, or at least it's highly unlikely.
Could be that they are simply following the information and training given BY Federal Immigration agencies TO State and Local law enforcement agencies.

ICE and Federal Law Enforcement Training Center hold kick-off ceremony welcoming class of 287 (g) officers
 
Back
Top Bottom