The Future of SB 1070

Over the past few months Americans nationwide have watched to see precisely how Arizona Senate Bill 1070 would end up on its enactment date of July 29, 2010. According to the Washington Post/ABC, 41% of Americans oppose the bill while 58% support it. In opposition to the bill, seven lawsuits were handed to Judge Susan Bolton of Arizona’s District Court in regards to the new bill. Just hours before the bill was to be enacted, Bolton spoke on behalf of the lawsuit brought forth by the Obama administration. AZ SB 1070 was, essentially, turned down. Does this mean the bill is completely dead? Or, is it still very much alive?

With Bolton’s ruling, many in opposition to the bill have claimed victory. Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard claims, “Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost” (Archibold). Goddard and others are in agreement with Bolton that SB 1070 violates the Constitution because: 1) if enforced law enforcement would have to use racial profiling and 2) it preempts federal law. With Governor Jan Brewer putting up such an ambitious and persistent fight in support of SB 1070, many have painted her as a Constitution violator with Judge Bolton’s decision. AG Goddard seized the loss in court as a personal loss for Governor Brewer, bearing in mind that she is up for reelection come November.

Governor Brewer claims SB 1070 is just getting started. She is still in the fight; this is just a bump in the road of the ongoing battle with the Obama administration. The issue is far from resolved and she is not giving up until either the bill goes into effect or the Obama administration does something about the problems associated with illegal immigration and border security that her state faces. The popular governor has appealed Judge Bolton’s decision to the 9th circuit and plans on taking it a step further to the Supreme Court to have a ruling from the highest court of the land. According to the Associated Press, 18 other states still plan to move forward with immigration laws similar to Arizona’s and have not been discouraged by Bolton’s ruling. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona says he is still carrying out immigration sweeps in his county and is not intimidated by the current ruling (Billeaud & Myers). Sheriff Arpaio and Governor Brewer are working together with the support of many other states, attorney generals and citizens to continue fighting illegal immigration, with or without SB 1070, and with or without help from the Obama administration. They believe that their cause is just and their morals continue to hold strong.

Neither side is quitting. In the liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Governor Brewer and SB 1070 will be struck down again and the real scrutiny test of the bill will be held at the Supreme Court, where the Obama administration will undoubtedly meet Brewer and her legal team. Currently, the Supreme Court is more conservative in interpretation of laws in accordance with the Constitution rather than viewing the Constitution as a living, malleable document with laws open to liberal interpretation. This is why Governor Brewer has high hopes for SB 1070. The racism card is a faulty argument put forth by the mainstream media far too often and, in this case, has no place in the Supreme Court. The real test for the Court will be whether or not it violates the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

In the way it is written, the law itself absolutely does not preempt federal law. However, the issue at hand is: can each individual state make their own immigration law, or is that solely a federal jurisdiction that can only be enforced by the federal government? Supporters of SB 1070 say the state is only trying to help the federal government, just as they do when it comes to all other laws. The states should definitely have some say, especially if the federal government ignores the state’s desperate cries for help. At the same time, this nation would be a mess if each state were permitted to have its own immigration laws. There would be chaos at state-to-state borders, the nightmare of enforcement on a national level, the role of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would have to be redefined, and on and on.

Enforcing the laws surrounding illegal immigration is out right the duty of the federal government, the Obama administration. This issue is much more complex than the media makes it out to be. The Obama administration is playing politics instead of doing its sworn duty to defend and protect this country, which includes securing our porous borders. With the catastrophic, horrendous reminder we have of 9/11, lest we forget what can happen when our borders are not secure and people can illegally enter this country. As stated in previous blogs, the Obama administration is ignoring Governor Brewer’s legitimate calls for help on purpose; he is securing votes for the November midterm elections from those that oppose this law. Governor Brewer has been forced to play the nasty game of immigration politics and she anticipates that she and Arizona will prevail. Brewer has lost one battle, but the war is far from over.

References:

Jacques Billeaud and Amanda Lee Myers. Ariz. files appeal as sheriff launches new sweep. Associated
Press. Retrieved on July 30, 2010 from Yahoo News.

Photo. Retrieved on August 2, 2010 from notconformedthoughts.com.

Photo. Retrieved on August 2, 2010 from politicsdaily.com.

Poll. ABC News/Washington Post Poll: Immigration. Retrieved on August 2, 2010 from http://
abcnews.go.com/images/WN/1110a8%20Immigration.pdf.

Randal C. Archibold. Judge blocks Arizona’s immigration law. The New York Times. Retrieved on July 30,
2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/29/us/29arizona.html?_r=1&scp=
1&sq=bolton&st=cse.

Boycott Versus Buycott

If a homogenous group opposes something in today’s political arena one of the first things they cry is “boycott”. Those who are called out and suffer from the boycott return with their battle cry, “buycott”. This has been seen by the opposition and supporters of Arizona Senate Bill 1070. Arizona legislator, Raul Grijalva, called for the entire United States to boycott the state of Arizona in the form of conventions, business, parties, vacations, sports, etc. The citizens of Arizona countered the boycott with a buycott which has received national support.


Those in opposition of Arizona SB 1070 have not only been protesting in the streets of Arizona’s capitol, but they are also boycotting Arizona on a national level. On April 20, 2010, Arizona congressman Grijalva called for a boycott against his own state, “There has to be an economic sanction for this. Our economic sanction is: do not do business with a state that is propagating the idea that separate but equal under any law…can be codified” (Kain). Grijalva called for the boycott based on his belief that SB 1070 was written in a specific way to target Mexican people based on their race. Many Americans are scared that the law will target them because of the color of their skin. Though this law does not discriminate against race or target those that commit the illegal activity of being in the United States illegally, it does give law enforcement a tool to further investigate “undocumented” people in a crime or traffic incident- regarless of their skin color.

Cities nationwide have answered Grijalva’s call including, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, Seattle, Milwaukee, Sacramento, and many others. These cities have been canceling business meetings, sporting events, and contracts with Arizona cities, as well as the state. That is, unless of course, the contract benefits them. Chicago jumped on the bandwagon to boycott Arizona businesses but their morals were much outweighed by money when they exempted an Arizona red light camera company that they currently hold a contract with. Some of these boycotts are downright hypocritical, but they are holding strong and still in effect today.


Many Americans that were appalled with the boycott have fired back with a buycott in an attempt to counter the economic devastation that is possible from the boycott. A buycott is simple. It supports the businesses targeted by the boycott, which in this case are Cold Stone, Best Western, US Airways, Petsmart, and Uhaul, just to name a few. From anywhere in the nation Americans can support Arizona by spending their money at these businesses instead of competitors. Dr. Gina Loudon, the founder of Buycott Arizona, says businesses in the state have been punished unfairly because of the boycott (Kollipara). Though punishing businesses seems unfair, taking away business is precisely what a boycott aims to do. Boycotters hope that by taking away business from Arizona, they will cripple Arizona’s economy enough that the state will cry “uncle” and repeal the law.

Boycotting has become an extremely effective tool in politics. Those who call for economic boycotts reap the havoc on the target with extreme precision. This has been seen in Arizona with the economic boycott in response to the passing of Arizona SB 1070. However, a new counter strategy, proving to also be effective, is the buycott. Arizona is reaping the benefits of the buying power of those sympathetic to the state’s economic woes as a result of the Arizona SB 1070 boycott. So far there seems to be an economic balance of the two, but the true outcome will be seen July 29, 2010 when the law is enacted.

References:

Kain, E.D. Arizona rep. Raul Grijalva calls for a boycott of Arizona. True/Slant. Retrieved on July 16, 2010 from http://trueslant.com/erikkain/2010/04/20/arizona-rep-raul-grijalva-calls-for-a-boycott-of-arizona/.

Kollipara, Puneet. Ariz. immigration law backers plan to ‘buycott’ to offset boycotts. The Hill. Retrieved on July 16, 2010 from http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/100449-ariz-immigration-law-backers-plan-buycott-to-offset-boycotts.

Photograph. Flickr from Yahoo. Retrieved on July 17, 2010 from http://images.search.yahoo.com/images.

Photograph. From Teri Codner.

Why do we need SB 1070?

On the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty there is a poem by Emma Lazarus. One of the most recognized lines reads, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” The United States of America gives the warmest, most sincere welcome to anyone who wishes to enter. The color of your skin, the place of your birth and the religion you practice does not matter. Not only do we embrace [legal] immigration in this land of the free, but we also trust immigrants with the responsibility of pursuing their immigration status to become a legal citizen. Unfortunately, America is now being taken advantage of and trampled on by people who resort to being illegal aliens instead of becoming legal immigrated citizens of this nation. It is time for America to toughen up. The passage of Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is the first bold step that has been taken to restore this great nation and its immigration policies. The previous two blogs explain the who, what, when, where, and how of SB 1070. Following are several reasons why SB 1070 is necessary in Arizona.

Currently there are eleven million illegal aliens in the United States (Obama) and 460,000 of those reside in Arizona (Broomhead). Both of these numbers are far too large to be ignored, which the federal government has been doing for decades. Due to the fact that no recent president has confronted America’s immigration problem beyond rhetoric, some state governors are now taking steps to be able to enforce the federal laws on a state level. Paving the way is Arizona Governor Jan Brewer who signed SB 1070 into law. In Arizona, 50% of homicides are carried out by illegal aliens and the city of Phoenix has now become the kidnapping capital of the United States (Broomhead). Arizona geographically shares 370 miles of border with Mexico (NDIC), whose citizens are streaming across Arizona’s porous border, undocumented, on a daily basis. In addition, 35 Islamic countries, known to harbor terrorists, contribute to those crossing the border illegally each year(Longley).

Those who come to America undocumented, hence illegally, are breaking the law. Not only do illegal aliens break our laws as soon as they step foot across our borders, but being in America undocumented causes them to break many other laws and puts burdens on the citizens of America. “Billions are lost in taxes each year because [illegal aliens] are paid under the table,” claims President Barak Obama. America relies on taxes in order to support our country’s infrastructure, social security, and welfare programs. Those that do not pay taxes are breaking the law and taxpayers are forced to shell out billions a year to Title 1 school programs, education daycare, health care, food stamps, Section 8 housing and subsidized rent, bilingual services, SSI and Medicare. In addition, many do not maintain car insurance, which is illegal and puts all Americans at risk. As citizens of this nation, we continue to uphold the laws of the land and are continually burdened with the costs to support the needs of illegal aliens as they continue to break our laws and eat off of our backs.


Not only will SB 1070 enforce federal illegal immigration laws and reduce costs for taxpayers, it will aide in reducing the dangerous drug problem that has entered the United States via Mexico. Drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) smuggle methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, and marijuana from Mexico into Arizona daily. Because Arizona is a national- level distribution center with highways extending to both our East and West coasts (NDIC), this is not a problem Arizona faces on its own; this is a problem the entire nation faces. Along with trafficking the drugs, comes protection of the goods. DTOs carry an extensive range of weaponry and often engage in shoot-outs with rival gangs, law enforcement, and citizens. This illegal activity in the United States is becoming more and more dangerous and moving further north into Arizona. In many instances the DTOs are better equipped than our law enforcement and have already claimed the lives of many innocent citizens and law enforcement officers.

Although the majority of Arizonians and Americans support SB 1070, there are many who believe that the previously mentioned reasons for why the bill needs to be enforced are not strong enough. They believe comprehensive immigration reform, including amnesty, is the answer. Though there is no specific plan of action for comprehensive immigration reform, it includes admittance to breaking the law, registering, paying taxes, paying a fine, and learning English (Obama). Why amnesty? This is a way to let illegal aliens remain in America without deportation back to their country of origin and without disrupting their lives and families. This is a political maneuver that sympathizers use to fight on behalf of illegal aliens and in turn receive the majority of their eleven million votes in elections. Thus, increasing the support from minority groups and cementing election bids.

Illegal immigration is not only an Arizona issue. Illegal immigration is an issue that America faces as an entire nation. Whatever steps we take to address the problem, the problem needs to be fixed, not merely bandaged. Immigrants- both legal and illegal- need to respect the laws of the United States and abide by them. As Arizona trailblazes forward on the illegal immigration issue, the United States needs to take a tough stance on illegal immigration by enforcing the nation’s existing immigration laws.


References:

Barak Obama. Immigration Speech on July 1, 2010.

Mike Broomhead. KFYI. Referenced Associated Press article on/around June 28, 2010.

National Drug Intelligence Center. Arizona’s Drug Threat Assessment. Retrieved on July 2, 2010 from http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs6/6384/overview.htm.

Pictures. Retrieved on July 4, 2010 from http://images.travelpod.com/users/eightydaze/1.1217037360.lady-liberty.jpg and http://www1.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/Border+Patrol+Seizes+Drugs+Illegal+Immigrants+gAUDGiw5eAXl.jpg.

Robert Longley. Terrorists: The 'Other' Illegal Immigrants. Retrieved on July 5, 2010 from http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/defenseandsecurity/a/otmaliens.htm.

The Myth and the Media

There is a pervasive force in the United States. This force addresses hot issues of the day, informing and arming the public. It is the media. On every television and billboard and in every magazine and newspaper the media is lurking and aiming to persuade all who will let it. Though few outlets present in a totally unbiased, factual fashion, most put their slant on the news and dish it to their audiences. Look at the handling of the recently passed Arizona Senate Bill 1070. Some portray the law to be racially biased, while other sources argue SB 1070 is nothing of the sort. Is Arizona SB 1070 a racist piece of legislation?

In an article in the Huffington Post, Bennet Kelley claims SB 1070 is racist legislation because “[Arizona is] the only border state that still has a white majority [and] adopted a new law requiring law enforcement to question people on their immigration status if they had a reasonable suspicion that the person may be an undocumented alien.” This statement clearly shows the author’s bias which is passed on to the general public through water cooler talk, television news and hearsay (gossip). This statement provides no proof of racism in the bill or in the law enforcement; in fact, this is a statement that could be made on either side of this argument. This is a typical response for those who oppose the law. Kelley twists the factual component of his statement by adding in his own race-based comments, “the white majority in Arizona,” in such a manner to make his readers believe that Arizona is predominantly full of Caucasian racists. Kelley attempts to prove Arizona SB 1070 to be a racist law but factually shows no support for this claim in his article. Without any critical analysis of claims such as this one made by Kelley, it is understandable why one could believe that the law in question is racially biased.

Heather Mac Donald, on the other hand, writes in City Journal, “[The law] empowers local police officers to check the immigration status of individuals whom they have encountered during a “lawful contact,” if an officer reasonably suspects the person stopped of being in the country illegally, and if an inquiry into the person’s status is “practicable.” The officer may not base his suspicion of illegality “solely [on] race, color or national origin.”…The law also requires aliens to carry their immigration documents, mirroring an identical federal requirement.” Though Mac Donald seemingly supports Arizona SB 1070, she shows very little bias since she uses the law itself as a foundation for her argument. As did Kelley, Mac Donald provides no proof of racism in the bill or in the enforcement of the law. There are no twists here: the author of this article refers only to the federal and state immigration laws and quotes Arizona SB 1070 multiple times. Mac Donald attempts to persuade readers, but does so without a spin and without poking fun at those that disagree with her. Mac Donald claims Arizona SB 1070 has no racial biases and factually supports that claim.

Without looking any further or gathering facts, I can understand why someone would read Kelley’s article and too claim SB 1070 to be a racist piece of legislation. With so many opinion- based claims being made, there is a true fear in the streets of Arizona that the officers enforcing SB 1070 will present a racial bias towards Americans with darker skin. The media has succeeded; they have created a genuine moral panic. However, all things considered, I believe the officers and administrators of Arizona do not wish for any injustices towards any legal citizen of America. Arizonians hold the Constitution near to their hearts, welcome legal immigration and are not racist. This law enforces something that has been illegal here in America for decades. In the words of the author of SB 1070, Russell Pearce, “Illegal is not a race- it is a crime.”

Multiple sources in the media claim SB 1070 is a racist law. Next time you listen to the media, dissect what is being said to discover the truth to the message they are presenting, listen to what they are really saying. Think for yourself. Draw your own conclusions. Is your source really projecting the truth? Are you being presented with the entire story? Every single day that has passed since Governor Jan Brewer signed Arizona SB 1070 into law there have been cries that the law is racist. However, I have yet to hear a factual explanation as to why this law is racist. The law contains no inherent racism, as Mac Donald pointed out. Arizona has no intentions to be racist or even to stop legal immigration; Arizona SB 1070 is a simple law in place to enforce a federal illegal immigration law. If the federal and state bills contain no racism, then where does this debate even stem from? Did the media create this myth?


References:

Bennet Kelley. Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennet-kelley/a-whiter-shade-of-pale-ar_b_616032.html.

Heather Mac Donald. Retrieved on June 23, 2010 from http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0430hm.html.

Photograph. http://animalblawg.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/scales-justice1.jpg.

The Real SB 1070

On April 23, 2010 Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed Senate Bill 1070, a law that states “...the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona. The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.” This law arose out of many years of state frustration that the federal government would not uphold its’ responsibility to protect the United States’ borders.

Title 8 of the United States Code outlines the federal law regarding illegal aliens. “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall be charged with the administration and enforcement… the power and duty to control and guard the boundaries and borders of the United States against the illegal entry of aliens…” (Subchapter I). This law was enacted to aide in securing the borders and to protect the citizens of the United States.

To enforce the federal law, AZ SB 1070 was purposefully constructed to mirror the federal law. The Arizona border is not just a state border- it is also a United States border. According to South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, the federal government should be enforcing border protection. However, the Obama administration has cut the number of border patrol agents and taken a lackadaisical attitude on border security. President Barak Obama says his administration is examining the Arizona law and border security is, inherently, a federal issue.

The author of the bill is a native Arizonian, Russell Pearce. Pearce wrote the bill in accordance with the United States Constitution as well as the US Code. As long as the federal law is not abridged, Arizona can enforce its own law, according to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution. On July 29, 2010 the law will be enacted. Although the bill is controversial, this is the proper definition of AZ SB 1070.

References:

Flag photograph. Retrieved on June 15, 2010 from flickr from Yahoo.

“Obama’s Immigration Endgame” Video. Retrieved on June 15, 2010 from http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search?q=lindsey+graham.

On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, interview with Lindsey Graham. Retrieved on June 15, 2010 from http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search?q=lindsey+graham.

State of Arizona Senate Bill 1070 (Arizona legislature).

United States Code. Cornell University Law School. Retrieved on June 15, 2010 from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001103----000-.html.