Why the Arizona Immigation Law is Unconstitutional
There has been a lot of discussion of the unconstitutionality of the new Arizona Immigration Law, which would allow police to stop any person they may find "suspicious" - or have "reasonable suspicion" that the individual is not in this country legally - and ask for the person's immigration papers. Jonathan Turley, for example, on last night's Countdown with Keith Olbermann, emphasized that the Arizona law trespasses on Federal immigration purview, and on those grounds could be found unconstitutional.
I certainly agree, but would like to focus on what I see as a more fundamental violation of the Constitution in this new law. It violates the 14th Amendment to our Constitution, which begins
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The new Arizona law is intended to identify illegal aliens. But on the basis of "reasonable suspicion," an officer could pull over and demand papers from an American citizen, simply because he or she looked like the officer's expectations of an illegal alien. More specifically, someone who has dark hair and a mustache (as I proudly do) would be more likely to be stopped by a cop in Arizona, under this law, than a clean shaven guy with blond hair and blue eyes. That seems to me to be ipso facto a violation of the equal protection provision of the 14th Amendment.
Now, police stop people who may look like suspects all the time. If there's a description of a serial killer, which unfortunately happens to look like me, I think it's entirely appropriate that I be stopped and questioned (hey, I watch Criminal Minds). But that's a very specific situation, and unlike what the Arizona Immigration Law does, which singles out a whole class of people, who happen to look like whatever the Arizona police might envision an illegal alien to look like.
I hope this law is struck down as soon as possible, as the unconstitutional, un-American piece of state legislation it is.
10-min podcast discussion of this issue, with consideration of the amended law, and a response to Chris Matthews
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
bill benzon
Poppi Iceland
PattyJane
N. Jordan
Dr. Vanessa Neumann
CPH/NYC
Salon.com
Comments
For me, I'm just changing my license plate to "GRINGO".
"Enforcement checkpoints" for thing like DUI, current registration, etc. have been debated here in SoCal for a number of years. Arguably the most criticism is lodged against the City of Escondido which does these "sweeps" regularly, especially in areas with high concentrations of Hispanic residents and traffic. The charges, including by the ACLU, are that these are "de facto" efforts to find people who are "illegals". This ongoing debate is interesting to follow as Escondido defends them as traffic safety exercises while others see it as racist.
How will all this play out? I'm not sure. But maybe there needs to be a nationwide "Day Without a Mexican" like there was here in SoCal about 5 years ago. If there was--it would be awfully difficult to get a burger or taco or get a lawn mowed or car washed--jobs which "gringos" just don't want.
This is going to cost Arizona economically and politically. Most of all it will ultimately be found to be unconstitutional and the status quo will be returned to and nothing will have changed other than to increase the acrimony and to reinforce attitudes held by the "teabaggers". All scary stuff.
So...debate and fact-finding and earnest analysis is great. But for Zonies...it's PR, guys. I don't think they expected quite this much of a firestorm (I didn't say they were SMART about these things), but...that's the deal. They did what they needed to do.
And make no mistake, some of 'em are havin' a GREAT old time watching the fracas it caused amongst us liberals.
And by the way, like many people of "color" out here, my Native American ex has ALREADY been stopped more times than he likes to talk about, and asked to prove he's a citizen. And sometimes his tribal enrollment card isn't deemed "official" enough.
The law, again...has always been a little tricky out here. This is just one time that it's getting national attention.
About a year after I was cut loose, the owner sold the business to a large corporate conglomorate. And the new administration immediately cut everyone of them loose. It turned out that they were all here illegally, and working for less money than I was. I don't blame them. They were simply trying to make a better life for themselves. Like so many millions of others who skip the immigration procedures and polices.
The employers are where the onus sits, and any rectification must be done. As for the Arizona law, there is a lot of screaming about it, but almost totally ignorance of the fact that Arizona would not be doing this if the Federal Government dealt with the problem as they should. Maybe the Arizona law is unconstitutional and should be struck down. But get it right. It's only a symptom of a massive Federal failure.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Clearly giving the police the right to demand people's identification without just cause, and being too Hispanic is not just, is a direct violation of the Constitution and a citizens individual rights.
From my understanding of the law the police while stopping someone for other reasons (traffic violations, suspicion of committing a crime, etc.) my request proof of legal status if there is reasonable belief that the person being stopped is an illegal alien. The police cannot stop someone on the suspicion of being an illegal alien alone. Now I may be wrong about my understanding of the law, but that is how it reads to me.
Yes, most of those if not all who will be asked to produce proof because of suspension of being illegal in Arizona will be Hispanic. That stands to reason since the problem is due to the Mexican border. And yes some will be citizens of this country and will be questioned and asked to produce IDs. It seems deplorable that any citizen in this country would have to prove their citizenship, but it is also deplorable that 81% of all illegal aliens are from Mexico, Central and South America.
We can talk about hypotheticals of police abuse. Sure there are illegal aliens from all over the world, but 99% of Arizona's illegal immigration problem deals with Mexico.
Until we deal with this problem on a national level laws like this from boarder states may be the only solution since they shoulder the majority of the cost and problems of illegal immigrants.
Right, but they can ask to see immigration status papers, or proof of citizenship, if they stop someone for jaywalking or a broken tail light - simply on the basis of undefined "reasonable suspicions" that the person is an illegal alien.
M. Todd: "The majority of adult citizens in this country carry ID, SS card, drivers license, etc and if stopped by the police the first thing they will ask for is an ID. So nothing about this portion of the law is out of bounds."
The carrying of any ID if you're strolling down the street is optional. Same if you're a passenger in a car.
Obviously, drivers must carry licenses, but that a very different thing: society needs to make sure that people beyond the wheel know how to drive.
"Obviously, drivers must carry licenses, but that's a very different thing: society needs to make sure that people behind the wheel know how to drive".
Arizona has about 30% Hispanic population. It is estimated that 25% of this population is comprised of illegal aliens. The police cannot stop people walking down the street just because they are Hispanic. The new law states stopping someone for race is not a reasonable. Will some police do it anyway, I would imagine they will. Fact is some in authority abuse their authority.
You mentioned Jaywalking, which is a crime so if someone is stopped for jaywalking they will be issued a ticket. Part of that process would be producing a valid ID so you can be sighted. If you do not have one the police could detain you until your ID is established. Chances are if you are Hispanic on a boarder town in Arizona you will be asked about your citizenship if you are stopped for a crime even Jaywalking.
From a hypothetical and philosophical point laws like these bother me because they give those in authority more authority. From a realistic standpoint the problem in Arizona is 99% of the illegal aliens are Hispanic. So in reality most of those asked to produce valid IDs as proof of citizenship will be Hispanic. I also, understand that the majority of those who will see abuse of this law will be Hispanic. It is not a perfect world.
Now beyond all hypothetical "what ifs" the reality is there are 2 million Hispanics in Arizona. 99.999% will not be stopped while going about their normal business, just like everyone else. Because they will not be committing crimes, acting suspicious, or doing something that would cause the police to stop them. And 99.9% of the police have better things to do than trying to stop every Hispanic person in Arizona. It is just not going to happen.
Right, but even in this hypothetical case, (1) there's a big difference between a general ID (a driver's license, a university ID card, whatever) and immigration papers, and (2) as I indicated in my blog, police are not only permitted to obligated to carefully question anyone they have reason to suspect may have committed a crime. What, other than the way a general class of people look, would be the "reason" that someone stopped for jaywalking would be asked for immigration papers by Arizona police?
Profiling in AZ? Already done at immigration checkpoints!
I really feel for American citizens who live in AZ of Hispanic background. Some will be unjustly stopped and harassed because of the color of their skin. I wish our country could find a better solution to the problem. Laws like these scare the hell out of me. Random DWI roadblocks are unconstitutional, but, DWI stops are the result of society not dealing with the DWI problem until it got totally out of hand. The bulk of our immigration problem in this country is the Mexican border which is responsible for 81% of the illegal aliens flowing into this country. It is a fact and until we deal with the problem I fear more laws that single out Hispanics will be coming. And most likely the authorities will use these new laws to restrict everyone's freedom at some point.
bleach your hair, shave off the mo'.
have an i.d. chip inserted in your forehead.
there's various ways to advertise that you are a real american. if you don't regard the police as your enemy, showing an i.d. is no big deal. the problem is, america is a racist society, always has been, and looks like drifting backwards too. so the police are a threat to many ordinary citizens.
this is going to cost in a new way because of the threat of terrorism.
do you really want people in your society that you haven't invited, that are there illegally? it's bad enough when they are just fruit pickers driving down the price of labor, but some dark haired mo' wearing people are really, really angry with the u.s.of.a.
ironic, huh?
If you are stopped for cause all you need to do is show a driver’s license and the law requires the officer to assume you are here legally. Yes an officer may be sued if they stop some one for being brown. No you may not sue them if they stop you for robbing a liquor store and you have no ID and they make the leap to suspecting you may not be here in accordance to the law. You all should read the law with an open mind. It mirrors the federal and is very similar to laws on the books in over 30 other states. I doubt it will be found unconstitutional and it will probably be adopted by even more states. The real question is why has the federal government failed for decades to reform immigration and guest worker laws.
I wrote it in pretty plain English: I don't appreciate blatant violations of our Constitution, in this case, the 14th Amendment, whose equal protection clause would be violated any time an American citizen was asked to show papers, simply because he or she aroused "reasonable suspicions" that he or she was here illegally, when stopped by an officer for some other reason.
Seriously - what part of that do you not understand?
The 1st ... The 4th ... The 14th ...
This piece of draconian garbage will not hold up to even the lightest constitutional test, but it is still important that AZ strike this law down before it ever comes to pass.
On a side note:
There is a Facebook group with over 1.5 million members dedicated to striking down this racial profiling law. Also many people do not need to be persuaded to boycott AZ, they were already thinking about it or doing it.
One can only hope Jan Brewer and Arizona will do the right thing and repeal this lunacy immediately.
So sick of seeing ignoramuses make this comment.
I did read it, and it's obvious you didn't read the Constitution if you really ever read the law in question to begin with.
"It mirrors the federal and is very similar to laws on the books in over 30 other states."
Not true. No federal law anywhere fails to define what "reasonable suspicion" entails for a crime that is detainable.
The authors of this law, a group with racist founders called FAIR, can't even explain it nor can Jan Brewer. Nor can you.
This is un-American racial profiling and unconstitutional fascism.
I suppose it should come as no shock that conservatives support burning the Constitution and racism.