cadenas
Posts: 517
Joined: 11/27/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
quote:
Nothing wrong with profiling. RACIAL profiling is illegal.
There is no additional reference to race in the Arizona law, therefore on the face of it - and by your comment - this law doesn't profile any more, or less, than any other and is not a case of racial profiling.
The problem is with the "on the face of it"... Laws are unconstitutional when they have the EFFECT of racial profiling, even if the wording doesn't say so.
quote:
quote:
What about those people waiting for the federal government to issue them the documents they are entitled to?
I'd be the first to say the government was inefficient at running everything. However that was totally discounted when it came to nationalizing the auto industry, or when it came to the Health Care Bill. But I digress....
Got nothing to do with "government"; this happens in any bureaucracy. Just try waiting for an approval for life-saving transplant surgery from an HMO. People have died waiting in line. But I, too, digress.
quote:
There is always due process when it comes to forms and documents. Worse case, this would provide a good reason for the litigation recourse previously discussed.
That litigation has happened already. The real problem is tax cuts. INS (or now USCIS) is an agency that rarely affects the lives of voters/US citizens, so it was first in line to have its budget slashed. There was a time when a certain type of application (I-485) was handled by a total of FOUR officers. Nationwide. To handle about one million applications annually. To make matters worse, Congress then took the money they collected in fees - which by law was supposed to pay for administration - and redirected it to pay for border patrol.
End result: at some point, almost everybody who had filed paperwork had to file a separate mandamus lawsuit - and scores of people became "illegal immigrants" even though they complied with every letter of the law.
quote:
quote:
It's not that easy. In fact, nobody has EVER shown that increased immigration enforcement or restrictions on immigration improve employment. There actually is strong evidence that it will DECREASE employment. Difficult to ever show a result where's there's never been an example of trying. Arizona will provide that example.
Actually, we have plenty of evidence. For nearly 40 years now, since the 1970s, we have tried one strong enforcement approach after the other. None of them ever worked, and many have backfired horrendously. What we have seen is that the periods of highest illegal immigration consistently coincided with the periods of highest prosperity. Right now, illegal immigration is down dramatically.
quote:
Moving to CA EVERYTHING was more expensive; homes, food, gasoline. There are a few noteworthy exceptions; I pay 20%, not 20% less, but 20% of what I paid in NJ for lawn-care, housecleaning, and minor construction. I pay $150/month for more landscaping work than I got of $700/month in NJ. At first I tried to 'document' the legal status of people coming to work at my place however individual workers would show up making the process moot. Talking with the contractors and business owners they laughed and pointed out that the illegal workers would do the work for even less, and if I wanted to go down to Home Depot, or at the U-Haul rental office - I could find them with no problem.
Sigh. I know. I live here, and many of my customers are construction companies. To be clear: I'm not in favor of hiring illegal immigrants. Or, for that matter, any form of union-busting.
There is an easy solution to it, actually, but it is politically not feasible. The reason these workers underbid Americans isn't that they are HERE. It's that they are exploitable. We should do what we did until the 1970s: give away Green Cards like candy. People who have Green Cards aren't exploitable. It also makes securing the border a lot easier when you only have to hunt down the occasional drug smuggler, instead of hundreds of thousands of people who have no interest in committing crimes.
quote:
quote:
- Most illegal immigrants AREN'T Mexicans.
Agreed! And yet another factual reason why the Arizona Bill isn't nationality or rationally targeted.
In the contrary. Maricopa County's (i.e., Phoenix) Sheriff Joe Arpaio already hired Kris Kobach, who specializes in racial profiling (and has a number of lawsuits racked up to prove it). Kobach also works for FAIR, a nativist hate group, and wrote the unconstitutional Hazelton anti-immigration law. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/02/08/20100208arpaio-deputies-immigration-training.html
In the end, it is mostly a harassment strategy. ICE already said that because of Arpaio's high-profile racial profiling, they wouldn't accept illegal immigrants his deputies arrest.
|
RE: The State Senate in Arizona passes new immigration law - 
Profile
Not quite as much as the DNR Cops, but no other law enforcement agency does
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread