Arizona immigration law: Tougher (even worse) restrictions sought

[kpete]

Source: The Arizona Republic

Arizona immigration law: Tougher restrictions sought

by Mary Jo Pitzl - Apr. 29, 2010 04:08 PM
The Arizona Republic

A conference committee of legislative Republicans and Democrats has approved several changes to Arizona's new immigration law.

The changes still need final approval from both the House and the Senate before being passed along to the governor.

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, the lone Democrat that showed up for the committee, opposed the changes – and the new law as a whole. Sen. Manuel Alvarez, D-Elfrida, the other Democrat assigned to the six-member committee, was not in attendance.

Sinema said the revised version is even worse than what became law because it now requires a representative of a city, county or the state to determine immigration status in cases where they are responding to violations of city or county ordinance, such as a barking dog or tall weeds in the yard.

Sinema called the change "frightening."




Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2010/04/29/20100429arizona-immigration-law-changes29-ON.html

[EFerrari]

1. Sounds like the Republicans are trying to get the LEOs off the hook

somehow. What a horrible train wreck these cynics are. I feel for AZ.

[alstephenson]

2. Thanks. We're screwed here.

The Republican legislators don't even tell the Democrats when they are having committee meetings. It's a freaking circus.

[EFerrari]

4. I'm so sorry, al. This reminds me of when the TX Democrats

had to flee over the border in order to shut down the legislature. Do you remember that? Molly Ivins was still with us then. Maybe 2004 or 05?

[dmr]

13. Isn't that when DeLay called in Homeland Security to find them?

They were in OK?
:hi:

[EFerrari]

14. That's right! Seems like a long time ago.

:hi:

[depakid]

3. Should prove to be an interesting social experiment

as Hispanics actively avoid dealing with public officials and law enforcement.

The law of unintended consequences will rear its head in unpleasant, unexpected ways for everyone involved....

[Politicalboi]

5. Could this their

Twisted logic?

http://www.jabberwonk.com/flinker.cfm?cliid=sevb5

[Downwinder]

6. In order to deny racial profiling they are going to have to ask

everyone for proof of citizenship. If you live in or transit Arizona you will have to carry a passport. Since there are no age limitations on the law that includes children, too.

On considering, I think I will skip my 50th reunion at Central High School. Maybe they will come to their senses by the 100th.

[Igel]

7. By "proof of citizenship," do you mean US citizenship?

Because if you do, it's absurd. Many people legally in the US do not have US citizenship.

If it's just showing citizenship that's necessary, then any illegal immigrant with proper documentation could satisfy this by showing s/he/s a citizen of Mexico, Belize, or Burkina Faso.

This misses the point of the law entirely.

The law itself specifies a class of documents and then lists four common forms, one of which is a driver's license with the proper documentary base. My TX DL serves just fine. No passport needed.

What we have here is the second-hand reporting of a misinterpretation based upon a misreading. If that, even.

[Downwinder]

10. Is the officer in the field going to authenticate your footprint

on a birth certificate? Do all states require US citizenship for a driver's license? Does your 10 year old have a driver's license?

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TomCADem]

9. Seriously? Link? More People Support A Law Requiring Police To Ask...

...Where are your papers? What constitutes a reasonable basis? Give me an example.

[Fridays Child]

11. k/r

[Fridays Child]

12. k/r