Read the story above. This is a shame. I was initially opposed to this law when it allowed the police to demand papers of anyone who had a lawful "contact" with the police. We must not abandon constitutional protections out of frustration. Since"contact" was changed to "stop, detention or arrest" and some other minor changes were made in the law, I have been fully supportive. As amended, this law would achieve a laudable goal without infringing on constitutional rights. As amended, this was good law. If the federal government will not enforce the laws, then I think the states should. We must stop illegal immigration. Can this ruling be appealed? What are the chances of success? What next?
"Fixed," as in when you have your dog fixed. It has been neutered and that is a good thing.
I have been a critic of the Arizona law lining up with other conservative critics like Jeb Bush, Karl Rove, Fred Barns, Charles Krauthhammer and Mario Rubio. I know our own local Rush imitator and the big showmen of talk radio thought the Arizona law was just dandy as it was and they denounce all critics of the law as not real conservatives. Critics of the law are "RINO's," "inside-the-beltway types," and "the chattering class."
I don't take my marching orders from Steve Gill and Sean Hannity. I am disappointed so many conservatives seem to. When they are right, I am with them but I don't like those who would shred the constitution be they conservative or liberal. And to Steve and Sean, please stop yelling at me to read the bill. I have read it and it is not that difficult to understand. I would suggest you read it. It is only ten pages long. I will send you a link to it if you like.
Anyway, I am not now as critical of the law as I was on April 23rd when it was passed. On April 30, Governor Jan Brewer signed an amendment to the law that makes it "crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal and will not be tolerated in Arizona." Also, the law changes the standard for demanding someones papers from "reasonable suspicion" following a "lawful contact" to a standard like that in the other states of the union. As amended, police can stop suspected illegal immigrants only while enforcing some other law or ordinance.
It still may be an ugly law, but now it is not much more than meaningless empty symbolism. It is probably no longer unconstitutional.
The Arizona law is now like an offensive dog that is less offensive once it has been fixed. The worse part of the Arizona law has been fixed.
And, Steve and Sean and their followers, if the law was so wonderful as it was, why do you think they had to fix it?
[Excerpt] a 2006 survey by Latino Coalition found that 34.2 percent of Hispanic voters considered themselves conservative, while only 25.8 called themselves liberals. More than 53 percent agreed that it was more important for Hispanics to become integrated into American society than to preserve their native cultures. Offered a choice between higher taxes and more government spending or lower taxes and less government spending, 61.2 percent favored the latter. Moreover, like other Americans, Hispanics tend to vote more Republican as they age.
[Excerpt] Republicans who favor strong measures to limit illegal immigration should not sacrifice their principles to truckle for votes. But neither should they blindly blunder into a political wilderness for lack of finesse. (link)
Comment: Republicans would be wise to heed the advice of Mona Charin. By 2042 white Americans will be in the minority in this country. The Republican Party can not be a viable party and be the party of only white people.
Republicans have already lost the Black vote. Despite the fact that it was Democrats who stood in the school doors and blocked integration and it was Republican votes in Congress that passed the important civil rights legislation, Republicans get almost no Black votes. Having gone door to door campaigning for election in Black communities, I know that many Blacks are conservative, especially on taxes, on social issues, and eminent domain. On simple ideology, there is no reason Republicans should not be able to compete for black votes. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, we can’t.
Republicans had better be careful or we will permanently alienate the Hispanic vote. In 2004, Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote. Now, it looks like we are determined to throw that away. If our anti-illegal immigrant position gets translated as hostility to people of Hispanic heritage and disregard for the rights of Hispanic citizens we will drive Hispanic voters into the arms of the Democrats and they may stay there.
Marco Rubio is the former speaker of the Florida House who has taken on the Republican establishment of Florida and pulled ahead of Florida Governor Charlie Crist in the Republican primary campaign for the Senate in 2010. After Rubio pulled ahead of Crist in the polls, Crist withdrew from the race as a Republican and is running as an independent.
While it looks like Rubio could have won the race handidly in a two-man race, with the vote split three ways, the future of this contest is in doubt. Rubio has had wide support from the tea party movement.
Our legal immigration system must continue to welcome those who seek to embrace America’s blessings and abide by the legal and orderly system that is in place. The American people have every right to expect the federal government to secure our borders and prevent illegal immigration. It has become all too easy for some in Washington to ignore the desperation and urgency of those like the citizens of Arizona who are disproportionately wrestling with this problem as well as the violence, drug trafficking and lawlessness that spills over from across the border.
States certainly have the right to enact policies to protect their citizens, but Arizona’s policy shows the difficulty and limitations of states trying to act piecemeal to solve what is a serious federal problem. From what I have read in news reports, I do have concerns about this legislation. While I don’t believe Arizona’s policy was based on anything other than trying to get a handle on our broken borders, I think aspects of the law, especially that dealing with ‘reasonable suspicion,’ are going to put our law enforcement officers in an incredibly difficult position. It could also unreasonably single out people who are here legally, including many American citizens. Throughout American history and throughout this administration we have seen that when government is given an inch it takes a mile.
I hope Congress and the Obama Administration will use the Arizona legislation not as an excuse to try and jam through amnesty legislation, but to finally act on border states’ requests for help with security and fix the things about our immigration system that can be fixed right now – securing the border, reforming the visa and entry process, and cracking down on employers who exploit illegal immigrants.
Will movement conservatives now turn on Rubio and denounce him as a RINO? Please consider that there are valid reasons to have concerns about this bill. I want someone like Rubio in the Senate who has solid conservative values and who is a thoughtful person and who does not approve of laws that would allow the government to trample the rights of citizens. He is the kind of person I think we need in the U. S. Congress. I just sent him a contribution. Click here to contribute to the Rubio campaign.
While the bombastic, loud-mouthed, angry, radio conservative entertainers have been very vocal and enthusiastic in support of Arizona’s new immigration law, some of the more thoughtful conservative commentators say the law is flawed and goes too far.
I heard Mark Levine today and I think he was foaming at the mouth. I thought he was going to blow a casket. He argued we have a right to protect our borders and this new law is the way to go about it. He was very hostile to critics of the law and belittled and attacked David Brooks and Jeb Bush who have been critical of the new law. Several of the other talk show conservative have been equally supportive of the law and critical of the laws critics.
Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard and Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post both disapprove of the bill. Barnes says the bill goes "way too far" and calls it "draconian." Krauthammer agrees with those who argue the bill could create civil rights abuses. David Brooks says the law is "terrible" and "an invitation to abuse."
Jeb Bush, former Florida governor has said, "I think it creates unintended consequences." "It's difficult for me to imagine how you're going to enforce this law. It places a significant burden on local law enforcement and you have civil liberties issues that are significant as well."
Actually the new law, while bad, may not be quite as draconian as I first thought. The law may not amount to much. The text of the bill, “Requires officials and agencies to reasonably attempt to determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact where reasonable suspicion exists regarding the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation.”
That is nuanced. The police are required to enforce the law but yet still must make some judgment calls. The original police contact has to be “lawful.” I am not sure what a “lawful” police contact means and I am not sure what constitutes “reasonable suspicion.” I’m glad I am not a policeman. I suspect that the first time a Hispanic American citizen is thrown in jail for not having proof of citizenship the law will be challenged and we will find out what the law means.
While the law may not be quite as bad as I thought it was the first time I read it, it still is a transfer of power from the individual to the state. “Reasonable suspicion” following a “lawful contact” is no doubt a less stringent standard than “probable cause.” If it is not, then nothing really changes.
I find it disturbing that so many conservatives are ready to take the side of a lessening of the rights for the individual and a support more power for the state. Conservatives who generally profess love of the constitution and really like the 2nd Amendment and the 12th Amendment don’t seem equally as keen on the 6th Amendment. They don’t care for all that pansy-ass liberal stuff about “right of the people to be secure in their persons” and they don’t like all that stuff about “probably cause.”
And all that talk about “limited government?” Well, conservative want a government that is not powerful enough to force you to purchase health insurance but that doesn’t mean they want a government unable to throw you in jail if you are not carrying proof of citizenship.
Although they risk being labels “RINO,” or attacked as “elitist,” or labeled “inside the beltway,” or members of the "chattering class," I am glad that we have conservatives like Krauthammer, Barnes and Brooks who will do more than just feed people’s anger. I am glad that we have conservatives who will think and analyze. I am glad we have conservatives who will stand by their support of the constitution and stand for less government even when it is not the popular position to take.
Phoenix, AZ – Arizona Hispanic Republicans believe that it is unfortunate for Jan Brewer to support Pearce’s bill. The greatest leaders in our nation had courage, and we believe that Brewer made her decision in an effort to save her political career. Jan Brewer’s decision will mark today as the day in which Hispanic Americans will follow the footsteps of the Great Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. Pearce and Brewer do not see the unintended consequences of their actions, and it appears that they were willing to make decisions that affect us at the cost of trampling on our Constitutional Rights.
We believe this party was founded by Abraham Lincoln, a man who was instrumental in doing away with evils towards people of color. We must never forget the price Abraham paid with his own life, and for that we at least owe a fight to bring this party back to our true roots. Later, the Republican Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. picked up Abe’s mantle and helped fight the injustice of racism. Republicans in that era fought to free blacks from slavery, which gave people of color freedoms and citizenship.
It is unfortunate that our own members of the Republican Party believe that we have to trample on our Constitution in order to “enforce our laws.” We believe that Pearce is easing the requirements for “probable cause” and his attempt in expanding our government. What Pearce’s bill proves is that he does not have the answer for illegal immigration within the confines of the American Constitution, and in fact he is not solving the problem by creating more problems.
We believe United States Hispanic citizens have a right to be safe in their person from illegal searches and seizures, and we believe Pearce’s efforts are violating that. SB 1070 is a direct slap in the face to Hispanic Americans who have fought and died for several American wars because this new law can be abused by authorities to pull us over with mere “reasonable suspicion”.
That said, and even though we are taking a stance against Jan Brewer and Russell Pearce’s law, we are ultimately holding President Obama accountable. Obama promised Hispanics that he would pass immigration reform within 90 days of his Presidency. Had Obama carried out his promises to Hispanics last year, the Hispanic community would not be experiencing the crisis we are experiencing right now. There has been recent criticism over our Senator John McCain because John McCain probably feels he cannot win the primary elections due to his previous stances on championing immigration reform and the consistent untrue attacks by Hayworth. It is understandable on why McCain believes he is in the fight of his life. For the record, Senator McCain has taken action in the past while Obama has not. McCain’s valuable experience contributed to Americans winning the Iraq war. The problem is this: There are more Latinos registered as Democrats in the State of Arizona that cannot vote for McCain in the primary elections and McCain wants to win. How can these hypocritical democrat leaders lay blame to the McCain when at the very least McCain has action to back his words? Why aren’t Democrat leaders holding Obama’s feet to the fire? Hispanics are more aligned with Republican values because of our social conservative values and our belief in the Creator; and if Hispanics want to make a real change to help change the face of our Party to bring it back to the Party of Abraham Lincoln, then I call upon all Latinos (Democrat and Independent) to register themselves as Republicans in order to bring it back to those roots.
Hispanic families are agonizing over this issue. Russell Pearce has not articulated a proactive approach to what will happen to American born children and their welfare as they are ripped apart from their parents. In fact, Russell Pearce believes that children born of illegal immigrants should not be declared as citizens.
Arizona Hispanic Republicans will not vote for Jan Brewer this year because we are holding her accountable for supporting a bill that violates the Constitution and our Civil Rights. I have sounded the alarm to all Republicans in this state that the passing of this bill is political suicide.
The State of Arizona already has a blemish because we were the last state of the Union to recognize Martin Luther King as an official holiday. Arizona Hispanic Republicans will write an open letter to our RNC Chair, Michael Steele, as he continues to consider where to hold our next 2011 GOP convention. We will caution our RNC Chair to consider the consequences of that because then it could be perceived as rewarding the state that implemented strong anti-Hispanic laws that has rattled our community and our Civil Rights.
Comment: By 2042 white Americans will be in the minority in this country. The Republican Party can not be a viable party and be the party of only white people. If we only honor the constitution when it is convenient we deserve to be a permanent minority party. We are driving Hispanics into the arms of the Democratic Party.
by Rod Williams, April 10, 2010 - I am a small government Republican. As such, I am opposed to the nanny state. I don’t want a safety net that protects people from the consequences of their actions. If I rode a motorcycle and wanted to be stupid and ride without a helmet, I don’t want the government requiring me to wear a helmet. I don’t want womb to tomb government welfare programs. I want some people to excel and others to fail. I want it to still be possible to get rich in America. I don't want government taking money I earn and giving it to someone else. I reject the notion that if it moves we must regulate it and tax it. I want less bureaucracy and lower taxes.
Also, however, being a small government Republican means I don’t want a police state. I don’t want the government reading my email or listening in on my phone conversations without a warrant issued for probable cause. I support the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” I don’t want the government pressuring my employer to make be pee in a cup to insure I have not been smoking marijuana. I don’t want the government keeping track of what library books I read or websites I visit. I don’t want the police beating confessions out of suspects. I like "innocent until proven guilty." I don't even want cameras catching me running red lights.
This week Arizona passed an anti-illegal immigration bill. This bill would require law enforcement officers to investigate, detain and arrest people if there is ‘reasonable suspicion’ that a person may be undocumented. It would give state and local police the power to detain people who cannot prove their citizenship or legal right to be in the country.
Unfortunately, many conservatives are applauding this law. I don’t know about you, but I don’t carry a passport or a birth certificate. Many Americans don't have passports. We do not have a form of national ID and I don't want one. With fifty states, each with their own design for birth certificates and with birth certificates easily forgeable, I am not sure that a birth certificate proves citizenship. This bill gives too much authority to the police.
I don’t want America to become a nation where the police stop you and make you show your papers. I like the idea that the police can’t stop you without probable cause. I want a government that fears the people, not people who fear the government. I don’t want America to become a nation where you must “show me your paper.”
As the author of A Disgruntled Republican I often post items which I think may be of interest to the conservative, Republican, libertarian or the greater community. Posting of a press release or an announcement of an event does not necessarily indicate an endorsement. Rod
Posts
