Arizona’s Misguided Immigration Law

Barack Obama took the opportunity to call out the state of Arizona yesterday during a White House ceremony where a number of US service members became naturalized citizens. Obama said if we fail to act (he uses that phrase all the time to trump up the urgency) we will get more misguided efforts like the one in Arizona.

Arizona’s Governor responded by signing the legislation into law thus giving her police the tools to fight a problem that is the result of federal inaction. The federal government has had opportunities to stop the flow of people coming here illegally but it refuses to do anything meaningful. The federal government has given amnesty two times in the past and each time the amnesty came with a promise that this would not be necessary ever again and that the border would be closed and immigration laws followed.

Instead, we now have about 12 million people here illegally and their presence is a burden to the financial system of our country and they are a particular burden to the states because the states end up paying for them. They attend schools, they get government (taxpayer) money from social programs and they commit crimes. Those who support the illegals say that they commit no more crime than citizens do. Who cares? If they were NOT here they would be committing NO crime here.

Obama and his Democrats are working up yet another amnesty program that will allow people who broke the law to get here and are in violation of the law each and every day, to become citizens.

This is the only thing misguided here.

The Arizona law allows police to require proof that one is here legally if that person has made contact with police for some other reason. If they are pulled over for speeding or involved in an accident then they can be asked. ANYONE can be asked to prove legal residence.

This law is the direct result of federal inaction and Arizona’s patience running out after a huge influx of illegals, drug related crimes involving illegals, murders caused by illegals and kidnapping at the hands of illegals.

If the federal government had kept its promise after either of the other two amnesties this law would not be necessary but since the federal government has been playing games with the issue, Arizona was forced to act. Arizona is a sovereign state and has a right to protect its borders. It has a right to check to see if people who are there are there legally.

Therefore, all people should be required to prove that they are here legally to (among other things) enroll in school, apply for welfare, buy or rent a place to live, get a driver’s license, and get a job.

Those of us who are citizens are required to prove this for a number of things. It is high time that we applied this to everyone so we can weed out those who do not belong here.

I can understand how Obama would be opposed to Arizona’s law. He has been asked for his papers a number of times and has refused to produce them.

Arizona looks to address that as well.

Others:
Cassy Fiano
Politico
MSNBC
Washington Post
AZCentral
al-Reuters
Rasmussen

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

6 Responses to “Arizona’s Misguided Immigration Law”

  1. Like it or not, federal action and inaction have destroyed the American border as an objective fact. Today it has no significance in law; it’s just a line on a map.

    Though the Constitution doesn’t explicitly say so, the fact of nationhood confers the power and responsibility of border enforcement on the federal government; a nation cannot be a nation unless its national government possesses that power and that responsibility. Thus, the Arizona law will eventually be struck down as ultra vires on the part of that state’s legislature. But it will still serve a useful purpose: it will compel Washington to admit to its flaccidity in the present and its mistakes in the past.

    Perhaps Capitol Hill will finally act. Whether The Won would sign a border enforcement bill is another and more dubious proposition.

  2. Samuel Adams says:

    At first I thought this was welcome news but it seems more of the same “one size fits all” policy. I remember applying for a part-time, after work, telephone survey job for scientific polls 5 years ago at the local campus of a major university. I had to provide 1 identification document from each of 3 categories. I showed them my state-issued driver’s license, concealed carry permit, military ID card and my work ID from the state. They were unmoved as I had only documentation from 2 of the 3 categories. Homeland Security. I had to return with my birth certificate so I could ask people which airport they preferred to use or what type of health care they had!

  3. I was born here, in this country. Yet I have to prove who I am on a regular basis. And whether I am a citizen. I had to get a California Driver’s License after taking a job and moving here. I needed a birth certificate or other documentation to prove my “true name”. When you apply to rent a place to live, ID is required. I also have a somewhat tattered card that is a pocket sized Birth Certificate. Complete with Clerk and Recorder Seal. Handy to have. Now there is no way I would ever be “profiled.” Well maybe as a “right wing extremist” being Retired from service in the US Navy. SecDHS is big on that one.

    • Big Dog says:

      No doubt Glenn. I have had to show my BC (a certified copy of the original, not a COLB) to join the Army, for every job that I applied, to get a passport, to get married. I have had to show it I don’t know how many times and the immigrants in Arizona are upset because they have to prove they are legal? Screw them. They can prove they are legal or get arrested.

  4. Blake says:

    What I find funny in an ironic way, is that most, if not all of this law just mirrors what the federal law also says, but in the abscence of enforcement on the part of the Feds, a State has the duty to protect its citizens, and NOT coddle those who broke our laws coming over here.
    You want to be a citizen? Then show us that you know and respect our laws, and do this immigration thing right, or don’t come over here- since the jobs are scarce, one might think that our citizens should have first crack at what jobs there might be.

  5. Virginia says:

    I ran across this article, thought I would I would post it.

    Immigration Reform? Let’s Try Mexico’s Immigration Law!

    The article that follows by Dr. J. Michael Waller should be an eye opener to liberals who believe in open borders and loose immigration enforcement.

    Mind you, this is the law of the land in Mexico, the third-world nation that has encouraged millions of its citizens to invade America.

    It is also the same country that threatened to take the U.S. to the UN for building a fence on American soil!

    Mexico’s Immigration Law:
    Let’s Try It Here at Home By J. Michael Waller, Citizens for a Constitutional Republic

    Mexico has a radical idea for a rational immigration policy that most Americans would love. However, Mexican officials haven’t been sharing that idea with us as they press for our Congress to adopt the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill.

    That’s too bad, because Mexico, which annually deports more illegal aliens than the United States does, has much to teach us about how it handles the immigration issue. Under Mexican law, it is a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.

    At a time when the Supreme Court and many politicians seek to bring American law in line with foreign legal norms, it’s noteworthy that nobody has argued that the U.S. look at how Mexico deals with immigration and what it might teach us about how best to solve our illegal immigration problem. Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

    in the country legally;

    have the means to sustain themselves economically;

    not destined to be burdens on society;

    of economic and social benefit to society;

    of good character and have no criminal records; and

    contributors to the general well-being of the nation.

    The law also ensures that:

    immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;

    foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;

    foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;

    foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;

    foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;

    those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.

    Who could disagree with such a law? It makes perfect sense. The Mexican constitution strictly defines the rights of citizens — and the denial of many fundamental rights to non-citizens, illegal and illegal. Under the constitution, the Ley General de Poblacion, or General Law on Population, spells out specifically the country’s immigration policy.

    It is an interesting law — and one that should cause us all to ask, Why is our great southern neighbor pushing us to water down our own immigration laws and policies, when its own immigration restrictions are the toughest on the continent? If a felony is a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, then Mexican law makes it a felony to be an illegal alien in Mexico.

    If the United States adopted such statutes, Mexico no doubt would denounce it as a manifestation of American racism and bigotry.

    We looked at the immigration provisions of the Mexican constitution. [1] Now let’s look at Mexico’s main immigration law.

    Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:

    Foreigners are admitted into Mexico “according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress.” (Article 32)

    Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34)

    Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37)

    The Secretary of Governance may “suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest.” (Article 38)

    Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:

    Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)

    A National Population Registry keeps track of “every single individual who comprises the population of the country,” and verifies each individual’s identity. (Articles 85 and 86)

    A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).

    Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:

    Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)

    Foreigners who sign government documents “with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses” are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)

    Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:

    Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)

    Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)

    Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico — such as working with out a permit — can also be imprisoned.

    Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,

    “A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123)

    Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)

    Foreigners who “attempt against national sovereignty or security” will be deported. (Article 126)

    Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:

    A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)

    Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

    All of the above runs contrary to what Mexican leaders are demanding of the United States. The stark contrast between Mexico’s immigration practices versus its American immigration preachings is telling. It gives a clear picture of the Mexican government’s agenda: to have a one-way immigration relationship with the United States.

    Let’s call Mexico’s bluff on its unwarranted interference in U.S. immigration policy. Let’s propose, just to make a point, that the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) member nations standardize their immigration laws by using Mexico’s own law as a model.

    John W. Lillpop is a recovering liberal, “clean and sober” since 1992 when last he voted for a Democrat. Pray for John: He lives in the San Francisco Bay Area, where people like Nancy Pelosi are actually considered normal!. John can be reached at: lillpopcommunications@hotmail.com