ARIZONA SB1070: Short Analysis (and Amendment HB2162)

Updated by FactReal on May 7, 2010 NEW: The Arizona Governor also signed HB2162 (PDF), an amendment to the original SB1070. HB2162 changes “lawful contact” to “lawful stop, detention or arrest.” HB2162 removes the word “solely” from “may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection.” HB2162 also reduces some fines, etc.
SUMMARY OF THE NEW ARIZONA LAW (SB 1070): ● Mirrors the federal law that since 1940 requires aliens to register and carry their documents with them.[2] ● Targets ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Americans do not oppose legal immigration. Why is it racist to ask people to come through the front door? ● Will NOT give police the power to pick anyone out of a crowd for any reason and force them to prove they are in the U.S. legally.[2] ● Reasonable Suspicion: SB1070 also requires police officers who, in the course of a traffic stop or other law-enforcement action, come to a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal alien verify the person’s immigration status with the federal government.[1] ● No Racial Profiling: SB1070 did not invent the concept of “reasonable suspicion.” Several factors are combined for police to arrive to “reasonable suspicion” that a crime has been committed. The law prohibits police to engage in racial profiling when making any stops. ● Prohibitions: SB1070 prohibits the harboring of illegal aliens and makes it a state crime for an alien to commit certain federal immigration crimes.[1] Countries have the responsibility to provide national security. Countries like Mexico have stricter immigration laws than USA.
CARRYING DOCUMENTS FACT: SB1070 mirrors the federal law that since 1940 requires aliens to carry their documents with them: ● The Arizona law makes it a misdemeanor for an alien to fail to carry certain documents.[1] ● Since 1940, it has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep such registration documents with them.[1] For 70 years, federal law has required non-citizens in this country to carry, on their person, the documentation proving they are here legally — green card, work visa, etc. That hasn’t changed.[2] ● The Arizona law simply adds a state penalty to what was already a federal crime. [1] ● Other nations have similar documentation requirements.[1] ● The new Arizona law mirrors federal law, which already requires aliens (non-citizens) to register and carry their documents with them:[3] U.S. Federal Law: 8 USC 1306(a): Willful failure to register Any alien required to apply for registration and to be fingerprinted in the United States who willfully fails or refuses to make such application or to be fingerprinted, and any parent or legal guardian required to apply for the registration of any alien who willfully fails or refuses to file application for the registration of such alien shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not to exceed $1,000 or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both. U.S. Federal Law: 8 USC 1304(e): Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.
CARRYING A DRIVER’S LICENSE FACT: SB1070 does NOT require that people carry a driver’s license. Actually, a driver’s license in Arizona proves the person is not an alien. Besides, all Americans are constantly asked for papers for routine transactions, i.e., banks, airports, etc.: ● Arizona’s law does not require anyone, alien or otherwise, to carry a driver’s license.[1] ● It gives any alien with a license a free pass if his immigration status is in doubt. Because Arizona allows only lawful residents to obtain licenses, an officer must presume that someone who produces one is legally in the country.[1] ● All Americans have to carry their driver’s license: Is having to produce a driver’s license too burdensome? These days, natural-born U.S. citizens, and everybody else, too, are required to show a driver’s license to get on an airplane, to check into a hotel, even to purchase some over-the-counter allergy medicines. If it’s a burden, it’s a burden on everyone.[2]
NO RACIAL PROFILING FACT: SB1070 will NOT allow police to engage in racial profiling: ● The law (Section 2) specifically states that police, “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” in making any stops or determining immigration status.[1][2] ● In addition, all normal Fourth Amendment protections against profiling will continue to apply.[1] ● In fact, the Arizona law actually reduces the likelihood of race-based harassment by compelling police officers to contact the federal government as soon as is practicable when they suspect a person is an illegal alien, as opposed to letting them make arrests on their own assessment.[1] ● NEW: The Arizona Governor signed HB2162 (PDF), an amendment to SB1070, to “make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated in Arizona.“
LAWFUL CONTACT NEW: HB2162 (PDF), the amendment to SB1070, changes “lawful contact” to “lawful stop, detention or arrest.” But SB1070 was already clear, so here below are the facts for SB1070. FACT: SB1070 will NOT give police the power to pick anyone out of a crowd for any reason and force them to prove they are in the U.S. legally:[2] ● The law requires police to check with federal authorities on a person’s immigration status, IF officers have stopped that person for some legitimate reason and come to suspect that he or she might be in the U.S. illegally.[2] ● “Lawful contact” defines what must be going on BEFORE police even think about checking immigration status. “That means the officer is already engaged in some detention of an individual because he’s violated some other law.”[2] ● The law only allows police to ask about immigration status in the normal course of “lawful contact” with a person, such as a traffic stop or if they have committed a crime. [3] SB1070, Section 2. “For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency…where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person…”
REASONABLE SUSPICION FACT: “Reasonable suspicion” will NOT permit police misconduct. ● Before asking a person about immigration status, law enforcement officials are required by the law to have “reasonable suspicion” that a person is an illegal immigrant.[2] ● The concept of “reasonable suspicion” is well established by court rulings.[2] Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words.[1] ● The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.[1] ● For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.[1] ● Since Arizona does not issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, having a valid license creates a presumption of legal status.[2] ● When Arizona’s governor signed the new law, she also issued an executive order requiring training for local police on what does and what does not constitute “reasonable suspicion.”[2][4]
STATE VS. FEDERAL POWERS FACT: State governments may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration.[1] ● While it is true that Washington holds primary authority in immigration, the Supreme Court since 1976 has recognized that states may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration without being pre-empted by federal law. As long as Congress hasn’t expressly forbidden the state law in question, the statute doesn’t conflict with federal law and Congress has not displaced all state laws from the field, it is permitted.[1] ● That’s why Arizona’s 2007 law making it illegal to knowingly employ unauthorized aliens was sustained by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[1] ● The SB1070 law is designed to avoid the legal pitfall of “pre-emption,” which means a state can’t adopt laws that conflict with federal laws. By making what is a federal violation also a state violation, the Arizona law avoids this problem.[2]
WON’T CREATE A POLICE STATE FACT: The Arizona law hardly creates a police state. ● When you read the Arizona SB1070, you realize “it is a reasonable, limited, carefully-crafted measure designed to help law enforcement deal with a serious problem in Arizona. Its authors…went to great lengths to make sure it is constitutional.[2] ● It takes a measured, reasonable step to give Arizona police officers another tool when they come into contact with illegal aliens during their normal law enforcement duties.[1]
WHY THE LAW IS NEEDED FACT: Arizona is the ground zero of illegal immigration.[1] ● The federal government estimated that Arizona had one of the fastest growing illegal immigrant populations in the country, increasing from 330,000 in 2000 to 560,000 by 2008.[2][5] ● Phoenix is the hub of human smuggling and the kidnapping capital of America, with more than 240 incidents reported in 2008. It’s no surprise that Arizona’s police associations favored the bill.[1] Also, 70 percent of Arizonans support SB1070.[6] ● We already have plenty of federal immigration laws on the books, and the typical illegal alien is guilty of breaking many of them. What we need is for the [federal] executive branch to enforce the laws that we already have.[1] ● Unfortunately, the Obama administration has scaled back work-site enforcement and otherwise shown it does not consider immigration laws to be a high priority. Is it any wonder the Arizona Legislature, at the front line of the immigration issue, sees things differently?[1]
SOURCES 1. ^ Kris W. Kobach, author of the SB1070 Arizona law 2. ^ Byron York, “A carefully crafted immigration law in Arizona” 3. ^ Center for Immigration Studies 4. ^ Arizona Governor’s executive order requiring the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board 5. ^ DHS: Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: January 2008 (see Table 4) 6. ^ Rasmussen Poll (4/21/2010): 70% of Arizona Voters Favor New State Measure Cracking Down On Illegal Immigration.
RELATED ● Kris W. Kobach’s Website ● Another Obama Gaffe… Immigrant ID Law Has Been On Books For 70 Years ● Coulter: I’ve Never Seen Any Issue Lied About As Much As Ariz. Immigration Law ● Los Suns from Phoenix ● Here’s what we can do for Arizona ● Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to Barack Obama: “No One In Arizona Is Laughing” (Video)

2010 FLORIDA ELECTIONS: Information Links

Updated by FactReal on August 24, 2010
ELECTION LINKS for the Floridian Voter Florida Candidates for the 2010 Elections Florida Division of Elections Florida Elections Departments by County State of Florida – Official Website Florida Commission on Ethics Florida Dept. of Law Enforcement – Voter Felony Conviction Information Florida Elections Commission Florida Legislature-Online Sunshine Florida Legislature – Office of Economic & Demographic Research
MORE Federal Election Commission Federal Voting Assistance Program IRS – Tax Information for Political Organizations U.S. Elections Assistance Commission
RELATED 2010 FLORIDA CANDIDATES & Campaign Donations 2010 FLORIDA ELECTIONS: Information Links Florida Division of Elections Florida Elections Departments by County 2010 FLORIDA ELECTIONS: VOTER GUIDES, CANDIDATES’ CONTRIBUTORS & MORE (links provided) 2010 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ELECTIONS: VOTER GUIDES, CANDIDATES’ CONTRIBUTORS & MORE (links provided) 2010 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ELECTIONS: COUNTY QUESTIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS (Commissioners’ votes, resolution background)

FLORIDA ELECTIONS: 2010 Candidates for U.S. Senator

The Florida Division of Elections has a great listing of all the candidates for the 2010 elections in Florida. Click the candidate’s name to find out more information: candidate status, campaign finance activity, and contact information.

United States Senator

Candidate

Armstrong, Lewis Jerome (NPA)

Askeland, Sue (NPA)

Bean, Bobbie (NPA)

Blass, Piotr (WRI)

Burkett, Glenn A. (DEM)

Burns, Kevin (DEM)

Crist, Charlie (NPA)

DeCastro, Bernie (CPF)

Drake, George (WRI)

Escoffery III, William (REP)

Ferre, Maurice A. (DEM)

Greene, Jeff (DEM)

Knepper, Howard (WRI)

Kogut, William Billy (REP)

LaRosa, Carol Ann Joyce (WRI)

Lock, Richard (WRI)

Meek, Kendrick B. (DEM)

Monroe, Robert (WRI)

Quarterman-Noah, Belinda Gail (WRI)

Riggs, Bruce Ray (NPA)

Rubio, Marco (REP)

Snitker, Alexander Andrew (LIB)

Thorpe, Marion (REP)

Tyler, Rick (NPA)

Abbreviations CPF= Constitution Party of Florida DEM= Democrat LIB= Libertarian NPA= No Party Affiliation REP= Republican WRI= Write-In

For more races, check the Florida Division of Elections – Candidate Tracking System

UPDATE 8/23/2010: - 2010 FLORIDA ELECTIONS: Information Links - 2010 FLORIDA ELECTIONS: VOTER GUIDES, CANDIDATES’ CONTRIBUTORS & MORE (links provided) MIAMI-DADE COUNTY: - 2010 MIAMI-DADE COUNTY ELECTIONS: VOTER GUIDES, CANDIDATES’ CONTRIBUTORS & MORE (links provided) - MIAMI-DADE COUNTY QUESTIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS (Commissioners’ votes, resolution background) - SAMPLE BALLOT FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PRIMARY ELECTION on August 24, 2010

Crist: I’m Leaving the Republican Party (…to Continue Helping the Democrats)

Finally! Charlie Crist leaves the Republican Party…maybe he should join the Crist Party since it’s all about him and not what’s best for the country. For years, he has been the darling of the leftist media that propped him as the “popular” and “charismatic” governor of Florida. RINOs like Charlie Crist have damaged the GOP – they work inside the Republican Party to undermine it and to benefit the Democrats. Dede Scozzafava, anyone? By running as an independent, Crist will only help the Democrats in the 2010 Senate race. He will pull to his side Republican voters who still fall for the utopian message from the unicorns moderate politicians. If Crist had any principles, he would have resigned from the Senate race months ago.
Via Townhall: “I don’t have either party helping me. But I need you. I need you more than ever,” the governor said, surrounded by cheering supporters carrying signs that included “Democrats for Crist.” [snip] Moderate Republican Senate candidates [a.k.a. RINOs] in several other states, including Arizona, Utah, Kentucky and New Hampshire, are facing strong challenges from conservatives supported by the tea party movement that sprung up in opposition to Obama’s policies. The governor has spent the past several years working closely with Democrats and embracing other causes not popular among conservatives. [snip] Just two weeks ago, he alienated many powerful Republican and business interests by vetoing a measure that would have made it easier to fire teachers and linked their pay to student test scores. At the same time, he scored points with the influential teachers union and other traditionally Democratic constituents who won’t have a say in the GOP primary. Many of those teachers attended his rally Thursday. Hours before his announcement, Crist was talking about Obama, saying he spoke with him about a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that could threaten Florida coastline. “He went ahead and volunteered any assistance the federal government can do,” Crist said. Meek predicted Crist’s independent candidacy will be good news for him.”

FOUNDING FATHERS and War: “Give me Liberty, or give me Death!” by Patrick Henry

Great virtual video! PATRICK HENRY, first and sixth post-colonial Governor of Virginia, gave his famous and fiery speech before the Virginia Convention on March 23, 1775 imploring his fellow Americans to take up arms against the British colonialists that ended in the immortal lines “Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death!” more

FOUNDING FATHERS and War

FRANCIS HOPKINSON, signer of the Declaration of Independence, wrote in his “A Political Catechism” (1777) that there are 2 types of wars: Offensive war and defensive war: Q. What is defensive war? A. It is to take up arms in opposition to the invasions of usurped power and bravely suffer present hardships and encounter present dangers, to secure the rights of humanity and the blessings of freedom, to generations yet unborn. Q. Is even defensive war justifiable in a religious view? The foundation of war is laid in the wickedness of mankind…God has given man wit to contrive, power to execute, and freedom of will to direct his conduct. It cannot be but that some, from a depravity of will, will abuse these privileges and exert these powers to the injury of others: and the oppressed would have no safety nor redress but by exerting the same powers in their defense: and it is our duty to set a proper value upon and defend to the utmost our just rights and the blessings of life: otherwise a few miscreants would tyrannize over the rest of mankind, and make the passive multitude the slaves of their power. Thus it is that defensive is not only justifiable, but an indispensable duty. [1]

PATRICK HENRY, first and sixth post-colonial Governor of Virginia, gave his famous and fiery speech before the Virginia House on March 23, 1775: Give me Liberty or give me Death! “Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing….We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances [complaints] have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation.	virtual video here
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free–if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending…we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of People, armed in the Holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Beside, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave…. The war is inevitable. and let it come! I repeat, Sir, let it come! It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace! — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery! Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” [2] Sources: 1. ^ Francis Hopkinson, The Miscellaneous Essays and Occasional Writings of Francis Hopkinson, Esq. (Philadelphia: T. Dobson, 1792), Vol. I, pp. 111-115. 2. ^ William Wirt, Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry (Philadelphia: James Webster, 1818), pp. 121-123.

SB1070: ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW (Links to Bill Text, Chronology, Guide)

Updated by FactReal on May 7, 2010 NEW: Amendment to SB1070 The Arizona Governor also signed HB2162 (PDF), an amendment to the original SB1070. HB2162 changes “lawful contact” to “lawful stop, detention or arrest.” HB2162 removes the word “solely” from “may not solely consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection.” HB2162 also reduces some fines, etc.
——————— Links to the Arizona’s Anti-Illegal Immigration Bill (Senate Bill 1070 or SB1070) recently passed and signed into law by the Grand Canyon State. It’s time to read the law before debating it.
LAW’S INFORMATION: Full text: SB1070 (PDF) via the Arizona State Legislature (bill signed by the Governor) Title: Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act Amendment: HB2162 (PDF) BILL’S INFO: Nickname: SB1070 (Senate Bill 1070) Title (s): Immigration; law enforcement; safe neighborhoods NOW: Safe neighborhoods; immigration; law enforcement Versions: Introduced Version (PDF) Senate Engrossed* Version (PDF) House Engrossed* Version (PDF) Amendment: HB2162 Conference Engrossed (PDF)
BILL’S CHRONOLOGY: Full chronology via Arizona State Legislature	SB1070 (PDF), Amendment HB2162 (PDF)
- 4/19/2010 Video: Senate Final Reading - 4/21/2010 Press Releases by Senate Republicans - 4/23/2010 Statement by Governor Jan Brewer on Senate Bill 1070 - 4/23/2010 Executive Order 2010-09: Law Enforcement Training for Immigration Laws - 4/23/2010 SB1070 is signed by the Governor of Arizona - 4/30/2010 Governor Brewer signed the amendment HB2162 (PDF) to “make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal, and will not be tolerated in Arizona.”
HELPFUL LINKS - ARIZONA SB1070: Short Analysis (and Amendment HB2162) - SB1070 explained by his author, Kris Kobach - Arizona Guide: Bill To Law
GLOSSARY - Alien: Any person not a citizen or national of the United States. (Source: CIS.gov, Websters) - *Engrossed: Once a bill has cleared Committee of the Whole it is “engrossed”. During engrossing all amendments are merged with the original bill and a “clean” bill is created. (Sources: Arizona Legislation, C-Span, Webster)

RELATED - Controlling Illegal Immigration: State and Local Governments Must Do More (PDF) - New Arizona Immigration Law Makes Sense - Cost of Illegal Immigration in U.S. Border States (Hat tip: NYT, Heritage Foundation) - Photos: Angry Mob at Pro-Illegal Immigration Rallies - Here’s what we can do for Arizona - Arizona Governor Jan Brewer to Barack Obama: “No One In Arizona Is Laughing” (Video)
	The illegal immigrant population in the U.S. has increased from 3.5 million (1.54 percent of the total population) in 1980 to 11.9 million (3.97 percent) in 2008. That translates into an illegal immigrant growth rate of 240 percent since 1980 compared to the total U.S. population growth rate of 32.3 percentage. (Source, page 8)

p.s. Sweetness & Light, thank you for linking to this article.

This is how Obama loves America (video)

Do you feel Obama’s love yet? What does it say when your President shows contempt for you, and reverence for foreigners (including enemies)?