Special offer

Arizona's New Immigration Law-- Nothing To Get Worked Up About!

By
Mortgage and Lending with Arizona Wholesale Mortgage Inc.

jan brewerI've been wanting to write this post for weeks now.  As a citizen of Arizona, this law effects me personally, and I do get a little annoyed when people who don't live here have such a strong opinion.  Conservative television hosts for one.  I have been in a thousand arguments with a thousand people (it seems), and none of them really seem to even have the slightest clue what the law says and does.

I am just going to talk about why this law dies soon in the future. Pretend I am a hardcore tea-party dude, or pretend I am Al Sharpton.  I don't care.  The article should read the same to you. Don't let Glenn pull us apart!

Many conservative friends have told me that this "has always been the law" and Arizona is just doing what they are supposed to be doing "federally" anyway.  (My same friends are always against "federal" stuff, usually...  Go figure, huh?)

Well, that's wrong.  This law states that any "suspected" person in Arizona is assumed to be an illegal, unless they have papers to prove otherwise.  And police must enforce the law or they can be personally sued.  Which federal law did Rush or Glenn or whomever else tell you this is "the same as"?

Mr. and Mrs. American citizen, when have you had your "papers checked"?  By this law that conservative pundits are saying has been there "all along?"  Come on now.  Let's all be honest with each other.

So during one argument, I told a group of three gentleman that they were right.  I agreed with them.  Then I asked that they show me their papers.  What do you mean?  They looked at me like I was crazy. 

I said, "Well, you just told me the law isn't racist and doesn't target Mexicans, so that means you boys should be checked also.  You should be carrying your papers, since you support the 'show me your papers' law.  Right?"

Interestingly, this argument always seems to shut everything down.  They became a bit confused, not wanting to trip over their own argument-- we were having a pint of beer at the time, so cut them some slack there-- and I just started to push them.

I pushed them and pushed them and eventually got them to admit, the best way to enforce the law-- and really make some headway in Arizona-- is to go after Mexicans.

And that is going to prove to be an enormous legal problem.  (Involving the U.S. Constitution.  Shhhh!)

But here's the thing:  I don't think anybody should be worked up about this other than conservatives, who don't like wasting tax dollars, and are going to look foolish when court after court strikes it down.  And it costs millions to defend, even though it'll never fly.  If you're a Hispanic in Arizona, don't sweat it one bit.  This thing is going to die quickly.  It's broken on it's very surface.

Here are three possible outcomes of the new law:

1.  The law is not at all racist, so police just start checking people (almost) randomly.  They hassle everybody from Minnesota (because you know y'all sound like Canadians); and they hassle the cute English girl up at my local pub.  People like me and the three guys I spoke of earlier-- and probably you, reading this article-- just might get arrested.  If nothing else, because you're not used to having to carry around "papers" in America.  We're kind of used to freedom that way.

As soon as American citizens start to get arrested-- the law dies.  If nothing else because of all the lawsuits.  Out of principal, because you've destroyed the constitutional rights of Americans.  The minute they arrest a whole bunch of American-Mexicans, they just deprived a whole bunch of Americans their rights-- and even though some people don't get this-- Americans, who used to be Mexicans-- are still Americans.  Look closely at the next group photo of American soldiers in Iraq.

2.  They only arrest Hispanics.  That would make sense.  I mean, most illegals that are here are Hispanic, but in my city, there are plenty of Canadian and Chinese illegals too (not many, but I know of some.)  Most are Hispanic; I get that.  But if they don't start bustin' up Chinese restaurants and stopping guys in Gretzy jerseys, it's gonna be all about el moreno.  Once the law demonstrates that it discriminatory, just by nature of the way it is carried out:  The law dies.  Supreme court has ruled on this issue before and you just can't do it. 

3.  Jan Brewer develops a horrifying future in which we ALL must have our papers at all times, where we can be stopped and questioned and possibly arrested.  At any time we can be stopped and demanded of to "Zeigen Sse mir ihre papiere!"  Shoot.  I mean, "Show me your papers."  Is that an America you want to live in?  Where American citizens can be hauled off to jail?


Yeah.  Me neither.  The law will die.  Probably, tomorrow, when President Obama meets with Jan Brewer and talks about how he is going to sue her.  Probably ends tomorrow...  Then everybody can go back to talking about more sane and logical issues, like secession.

Posted by

seo guru

Comments(27)

William Queen
William D. Queen, Real Estate Broker, Richmond, Virginia - West End, VA

Michael, you might call me one of the conservatives who does not live in Arizona but I really like Arizona and have had ties to the state. Also I'm more of a Libertarian than a conservative or Republican. I can find much empathy for your passion for individual human rights and I like you do not wish to cause any citizen of the United States or any authorized alien to be deprived of any rights or inconvenienced at all much less because of racism.

However I must argue with your post. First it became obvious to me that you are inconsistent in your accusations. Your opening paragraph states, ... "get a little annoyed when people who don't live here have such a strong opinion." I guess your annoyance is only with outsiders who may not agree with you. You made no mention of any of the non-Arizona schools, boards of education, city councils, federal agencies and offices that have expressed strong opinion, abet their opinions are in agreement with you. Therefore, I judge that your annoyance is not toward outsiders with strong opinions it is with their opinions. This bold & apparently hypocritical statement got me started questioning your arguments.

I have heard the talking points and arguments of those for and against the Arizona law. However, I must admit that I had not read the law. Before I would challenge your statements I decided to read the law. Which I did. Have you read it? I hope you have otherwise you are as guilty of not having a clue as you accuse others.

You stated, "This law states that any "suspected" person in Arizona is assumed to be an illegal, unless they have papers to prove otherwise." First the term "suspected" or "suspect" is not used in the law. Second the term "illegal" is used only four times in the law and never in the context that you suggest. It appears that your statement is false, the law makes no such statement.

You go on to state that, "And police must enforce the law or they can be personally sued."  The term sued is not used in the law much less "personally sued." However you may be referring to that portion of the law that states, "A person may bring an action in superior court to challenge any official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political  subdivision of this state that adopts or implements a policy that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law." And the law also goes on to state, "A law enforcement officer is indemnified by the law enforcement officer's agency against reasonable costs and expenses, including attorney fees, incurred by the officer in connection with any action, suit or proceeding brought pursuant to this section to which the officer may be a party by reason of the officer being or having been a member of the law enforcement agency, except in relation to matters in which the officer is  adjudged to have acted in bad faith."

Michael, it is easy to make arguments and also believe you win when you make false statements and base your conclusions on those false statements. You said it in your piece, "Come on now.  Let's all be honest with each other."  Don't make your case on what the law does not state and leave out what the law does state or accuse others who will be enforcing the law of acts that they have not committed and which acts are contrary to the very law you are against. I'm not sure this particular law is wise or not. I don't have any issues with people who do not like the law but please make your arguments with facts, honestly and congruently.

 Bill

Jun 02, 2010 03:23 PM
AZ Mortgage Broker: Michael George
Arizona Wholesale Mortgage Inc. - Phoenix, AZ
AZ Mortgage Rates

Hi Bill--

Regarding your first statement:  You are partially correct, I suppose.  But I wasn't really thinking about people who "just disagree" with me.  I never really think about the people that agree with me, because I think I am right...of course.  I know there is a "Flat Earth Society," and I like to think about how crazy those people are, but as far as the people who believe the earth is round-- I don't really think about them.  Either way though, as far as I am concerned, if you don't live here, this STATE law doesn't effect you, so why are you carrying signs and marching?  (Not you, per se.)

Second, you asked me if I read the law.  Did you read my post?  Of course I read the law.  It's a short read and available online in easy-to-download PDF form.

Third, you say the law doesn't use suspect or suspected.  That's what you said, after you grandly announced that you "read the bill."  Yet, all evidence says you did not.  How about this:

"where reasonable SUSPICION EXISTS...that a person is an unlawful alien...a reasonable attempt should be made to determine..."

Suspected = where reasonable suspicion exists

Unlawful Alien = illegal alien

I can help you with all the big words if you want.

Finally, you say that the law doesn't say a police officer can be sued.  It says:  "Any person who is a resident of this state has standing...TO BRING SUIT...against any agent or agency...to remedy any violation of this section."  You said the term "sued" is not used.  Yes, you're right.  They use terms like "bring suit" against-- or as you wrote, "bring an action against."  What do those terms mean?  Candy and flowers?

In fact, section 2 has "citizen suits" in the heading!  They must be talking about Armani suits.  Again, I have to ask, did you really read this?

You say that a cop can't be "personally sued", but what do you think "bring suit against an agent" of the government means?  An agent is one person.  That means a citizen can personally sue a cop, just like I said originally and just like the law CLEARLY says.

But here it is again, because you must not have read this law at all:

A person who is a legal resident of this state can may bring action in Superior Court against any official or agency that...blah blah blah...restricts enforcement of this law...not less than $500 and not more than $5000.  In what fantasy world do you live in which you can "bring action" against an "agent of the government" and "collect $5000" and it's not called a law suit?

Again, you say they don't use the term illegal in the way that I do.  Okay?  But why are you wasting my time and yours with MORE semantics?  That's what the bill is about; everyone knows the bill is about illegals.  But once again, you got me.  What they say is an "alien who is unlawfully present."  And how do we define an illegal?  Well, that's an alien who's unlawfully present.  I honestly don't get your "comment" one bit.  Your point is that I used the word "sued" instead of "bring action" or "bring suit against"?  That I used the word illegal instead of alien who is unlawfully present?  What the shit does unlawful mean?

Illegal = unlawful

And, after writing an entire book on my blog, you make absolutely no point or argument for or against the bill.  You just argue my vernacular with semantics.  I don't get it.  Did you have a point that can't be shot down so easily with word definitions and a wide vocabulary?

Jun 03, 2010 03:38 AM
Fernando Herboso - Associate Broker MD, & VA
Maxus Realty Group of Samson Properties - Clarksburg, MD
301-246-0001 Serving Maryland, DC and Northern VA

 "Zeigen Sse mir ihre papiere!" 

Just wanted to bring you the Spanish translation for this. 

"Muestrame tus papeles"

 

Your post is a breath of fresh air regarding this new Arizona law. .

Jun 03, 2010 03:47 AM
AZ Mortgage Broker: Michael George
Arizona Wholesale Mortgage Inc. - Phoenix, AZ
AZ Mortgage Rates

Gracias Fernando.  You're the first one who hasn't attacked me!

Jun 03, 2010 04:00 AM
Jason Sardi
Auto & Home & Life Insurance throughout North Carolina - Charlotte, NC
Your Agent for Life

After digesting all this, I won't attack you at this point in time either, Michael.  But if I find an opening, I will let you know;)

Nice synopsis.

Jun 03, 2010 07:19 AM
Paul Warkow
Paul Warkow-D.G. Weber Law Associates - Hauppauge, NY

There have been several posts regarding this law and I have commented on some of them.  My point continues to be that this is nothing more than a farce.  Conservative politicians pass laws like this so they can show their constituents they are tough on illegal immigration.  Politicians on the left scream bloody murder to show that they care.  The fact is that neither side really wants to solve the problem.  They just want the issue to fester so each side can get support from their constituents.

Republicans really do not want to solve the problem because they look at illegals as a cheap source of labor for their corporate supporters.  Democrats do not want to solve the problem because they are looking for votes from the Hispanic community.  I agree with your basic premise that this law is no big deal.  Because no one wants to solve the problem, it will not be enforced.  There will be a few arrests and deportations, but nothing to make a dent.

I think we can all agree that most illegal aliens come to this country for jobs.  If we really want to stop illegal immigration, take away the job opportunities.  Arizona currently has a law on the books that makes it illegal to hire illegal aliens.  If that law was actually enforced, less illegal aliens will be hired and less  would come to the US.  Instead of passing ridiculous laws, enforce the existing laws and arrest the employers.  However supporters of this law have no taste for having their contributors in a perp walk.  They do not want to solve the problem any way.

Jun 03, 2010 10:27 AM
Tchaka Owen
Galleria International Realty - Hollywood, FL

After reading that Michael's mom's Sicilian, there's no way I'm attacking him.  She'll come out of the house and kick my butt!!  Besides, I wouldn't want her to mess up the Armani suit I might be getting.

 

Mike - When you wrote, "It is only if reasonable suspicion exists" it was game over for you.  In a perfect world, that would make sense.  But it isn't perfect, we are humans and we are subjective.  "Suspicion" covers a lot of ground including baseless stops.

Jun 04, 2010 04:49 AM
Hugh Krone
Weichert Referral Associates - Hamburg, NJ
Realtor, Sussex County NJ

Hello Michael

 

Jun 04, 2010 01:16 PM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

First, if the federal government would actually enforce the laws on the books, this would not even have been brought into law... 

Second, you are making a huge assumption about lawful contact and reasonable suspicion.  Next, there are several interesting ways to be presumed NOT to be an illegal alien.  Among these are:

  • a valid AZ driver's license
  • a valid AZ non-operating identification license
  • a valid tribal enrollment card
  • a valid ID from a federal state or local government that requires proof of legal presence

So, the vast majority of people that might have a 'lawful contact' have likely been covered. 

Third, LEGAL aliens are REQUIRED under federal law to have their proof of status with  them... just as we are required to carry our passports when we are out of the country. 

One big difference is that the federal law does NOT require federal law enforcement officials to have a 'lawful contact' with a suspected illegal alien in order to inquire.  They CAN simply walk up to someone on the sidewalk and demand to see their 'papers'... and the federal law DOESN'T identify as clearly which papers are considered proof. 

Coincidentally, Obama himself has stated that states have a responsibility ot enforce federal laws when it comes to banking, so why not immigration?

 

And if you ask me to show you papers... I can do so.  Of course, the license in a GA one instead of AZ...

Jun 05, 2010 05:15 PM
AZ Mortgage Broker: Michael George
Arizona Wholesale Mortgage Inc. - Phoenix, AZ
AZ Mortgage Rates

Lane--

Your confusion is common.  First of all, and I'm only saying this from memory-- so I can't be certain-- but an illegal could get a driver's license in Arizona until 1996.  Our licenses don't expire here for about 30 years, so any illegal that has a DL issued before 1996 would be a citizen?

Also, people come here on work visas.  Or fiancee visas.  I'm not sure what the law is, but if somebody is coming here to live and work, I want them to learn how to drive, using our state laws-- not Bangladesh.  Then, when their visas expire-- and they stay illegally-- their drivers licenses do not dissolve into thin air.

Finally, an illegal in Arizona could just drive 6 hours to New Mexico and get one-- legal or not.  Utah is the same way.  So is Washington.  MAYBE California, but I'm not sure...  I just know there are a handful of states that will take alternatives to birth certificates when applying for a license.

You mention that aliens are REQUIRED to have proof...  Right.  That's true.  So what happens if a guy just looks at you and says, "I'm not an alien.  I'm a citizen."

Proove it!

Well, here is my Washington State Drivers License and my gym membership...  What else do you want sir?

Jun 08, 2010 06:40 AM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

Feel free to refer back to the law... THAT is where the list I published came from.  It IS possible that legal aliens with Green Cards might have their license expire at the same time as their Green Card. 

But the remainder of the point is that Federal Officers CAN stop people on the street and demand their "papers"... and according to Federal Law, those aren't sufficient.  And, as mentioned, The Federal Government IS telling states that THEY need to enforce Federal Law in regards to bank fraud and some other categories.  Why shouldn't they be allowed to enforce Federal Immigration law?

Jun 08, 2010 03:30 PM
Lane Bailey
Century 21 Results Realty - Suwanee, GA
Realtor & Car Guy

By the way, what can an AZ police officer do under the AZ law that a federal officer can't do under the federal law? 

Jun 09, 2010 02:05 PM
Nogui Aramburo
Linda Craft & Team, REALTORS® - Raleigh, NC
Real Estate Professional in the Raleigh Area

I would take a big ole dump on the officer's hood and remark, "Shall a DNA sample suffice?"

Jun 10, 2010 12:43 AM
Jason Sardi
Auto & Home & Life Insurance throughout North Carolina - Charlotte, NC
Your Agent for Life

Stock up on the chili, Noqui:)

Jun 10, 2010 01:02 AM
Betina Foreman
WJK Realty - Austin, TX
Realtor, C.N.E., with WJK REALTY

All I have to say is where would we be now if the Native Americas had done something like this?!? Would we be living in tepees and wearing buckskin and riding horses?? I say get real people!

Jun 21, 2010 03:03 AM
Doreen McPherson
Homesmart ~ Scottsdale ~ Tempe - Tempe, AZ
Phoenix Arizona Real Estate ~

Wow, I don't even know where to begin.  Michael, I met you and Karen back in the spring of 2007, in fact you invited me to AR.  I thought you to be extremely intelligent. Oh, and an excellent chef.   

I am not  too surprised by your opinion or attitude, but I am shocked by this post.  It appears you came straight from the pub and wrote it.  

I HAVE lived in AZ since 1960, I grew up in Tucson, and know a couple things about living with illegals in our midst.  But that's not the point.

This post and your comments sound incoherent.  You are changing words to mean what you think they should mean.  It appears you don't know what you are talking about.  

And just what exactly is this 'papers' BS?  You and I do not have to have 'papers', because we are citizens.  That will not change.  

I don't know about you, but I had to show my birth certificate when I got my drivers license.  I had to prove who I was when I originally got my license.  That was way before the 90's.  

And, as has been mentioned above, any alien in the U.S. has to have proof that they are here legally.  Whether it's a green card, a work visa, etc.  

This law mirrors the federal law, that the federal government has been ignoring for years.  

Local law enforcement does use the federal law.  They turn the people over to ICE.  

When our previous governor was in office, she harassed the Bush administration for NOT protecting our borders.  Wonder why she doesn't think it should be dealt with now that it is part of her job?  

One of the few things the federal government was established for was to protect our borders.  They have failed horribly here on the southern border.  

If this was any other country in the world, these illegals would be at the very least deported and in many cases imprisoned or executed. <--- without a trial. 

This isn't about Mexicans, this is about people breaking our laws.  

This affects the whole country, not just AZ.  

Check out what someone who came here the legal way thinks about this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShkpO9Rf1bo

Here is the bill for those who have not read it.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

 

 

Jul 12, 2010 04:23 AM
Doreen McPherson
Homesmart ~ Scottsdale ~ Tempe - Tempe, AZ
Phoenix Arizona Real Estate ~

Betina, Your statement would be extremely insulting to my Native American friends.  I suggest you think before you type such insensitive comments.    

Jul 12, 2010 04:28 AM
Dionne Bass
Ask The Underwriter - Atlanta, GA
Blog: Ask The Underwriter

Hi Michael,

I know this is an older post, but I just wanted to say that I "enjoyed" your post.  I won't get into why, but I make this comment in response to the other comments.  In 2010....some us are still being "racially profiled" in EVERY STATE.......  I know this was a sensitive subject so I'll keep it light...just wanted to let you know that I enjoyed your perspective...no matter how it was interpreted.

Sep 05, 2010 07:41 AM
Karen Anne Stone
New Home Hunters of Fort Worth and Tarrant County - Fort Worth, TX
Fort Worth Real Estate

Michael:  I just find it amazing that so many people can be just fine that such a sickening law like this can exist.  The current governor of Arizona is simply pandering to people's fears to try and maintain her "conservative status."  It is such a shame that laws like this can be on the books.

And yes... Doreen in #25.  Those nasty Canadians have either imprisoned or executed so many "illegals." How rude of them.

If my own definition of "illegal" were to be used... it would be based on a poster I first saw at a Hispanic rally in Los Angeles.  The banner said... "we didn't cross the border... the border crossed us."  The meaning was... that much of lower California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas... should actually still BE a part of Mexico.

Dec 13, 2010 06:00 PM
The Brewer Team - Benchmark Realty
Benchmark Realty - Franklin, TN

Michael - I've always had to product my drivers license in Tennessee, as well as proof of insurance and registration, any time I've been stopped by the police. 

Dec 18, 2010 01:41 AM