Posted on 04/30/2010 4:27:18 AM PDT by tobyhill
Arizona's tough new illegal immigration enforcement law would not be right for Texas, Gov. Rick Perry said Thursday, upholding the state's long-held tradition of rejecting harsh anti-immigrant policies.
The Arizona law will require local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally, making it a crime for them to lack registration documents. The law also makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally.
"I fully recognize and support a state's right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas," Perry said in a written statement.
"For example, some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe."
The Arizona law has been hailed by conservatives as long overdue and two Texas lawmakers have said they'll introduce similar immigration measures when the Texas Legislature meets next. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a U.S. Senate hearing Tuesday that a Justice Department review is under way to determine the Arizona law's constitutionality.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Here is the address to contact his campaign . I just ripped off an email telling him what I thought about his stance!
http://www.rickperry.org/contact
This statement appears more accurate with the ellipsis.
Oh brother. He’s so wrong on this it isn’t funny.
If Perry keeps up with the poor illegal crap he might well lose to the Commie!
Perry needs to grow a pair and schedule a spine transplant to stand up to the race-baiting advocates for illegals. The jobs will be filled by Americans...if they are offered to them.
Correction: America is so screwed.
“Texans need to “convince” their elected officials that it would be in their (and their states) best interest to back up Arizona.”
I have a problem with the Arizona law, to be honest. The idea that police can demand papers if there is a “reasonable” suspicion someone is illegal is too vague and open to abuse. It will also likely be struck down on Constitutional grounds.
In my opinion, enforcing immigration law consistently whenever someone has violated the law would be a better idea. Right now in most states if an illegal is pulled over or otherwise detained there are no immigration consequences. You could also add other concrete criteria such as “did not speak English” (combined with enforcing English as the national language - what a concept!). Finally, employers should be required to check citizenship, and the IRS should stop ignoring duplicate use of Social Security numbers.
I’d also support harsher penalties for repeat returnees, perhaps escalating periods of forced, non-compensated labor. I also love the idea of deporting “anchor babies” along with their parent(s).
The other problem is that to a large extent the “illegal immigration” horse has already left the barn. We have millions of Hispanics here as newly minted legal residents/citizens, and they’re outbreeding all other ethnic groups. It’s time for the “stupid white people” to realize that having small families will lead to eventual irrelevance and extinction, at least until there’s a level playing field. Large families have their drawbacks, but they have upside as well. :-) It’d also be good for the lowest folk on the intelligence/social totem pole to not be the most prolific breeders, for the good of society in general.
Perry was bought off by the homebuilders long time ago.
if the other states do not hang with Arizona, they will all hang separately
WILL YOU PLEASE STOP! The AZ law requires that public safety officers have to have already detained the person for other reasons before they can even entertain the possibility that the person is not here legally. Your extensive post then goes on to require that the law say EXACTLY WHAT THE LAW DOES SAY! Given this, what can possibly be your real objection??
Good grief!!
look at the droid army, dressed for combat!
Texas doesn’t need to pas the exact same law but they DO need to back up Arizona.
What really needs to happen is that the states and people who are serious about freedom need to start talking with each other, even to the point of creating a sort of “congress” between them so they can work these issues and strategies out before hand so when implemented they can present a unified front. In the end, this is how we are going to win our freedom, so we should stop procrastinating and start working towards the objective.
“WILL YOU PLEASE STOP! The AZ law requires that public safety officers have to have already detained the person for other reasons before they can even entertain the possibility that the person is not here legally. Your extensive post then goes on to require that the law say EXACTLY WHAT THE LAW DOES SAY! Given this, what can possibly be your real objection??”
That’s what I thought initially too, but from what I’ve read since it is not the case. Please cite a reference that backs up what you’re saying.
From the SCM (CNN):
“The bill requires immigrants to carry their alien registration documents at all times and requires police to question people if there is reason to suspect that they’re in the United States illegally.”
and
‘The Republican governor also issued an executive order that requires additional training for local officers on how to implement the law without engaging in racial profiling or discrimination.
“This training will include what does and does not constitute reasonable suspicion that a person is not legally present in the United States,” Brewer said after signing the bill.’
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/23/obama.immigration/
I’ve not seen a single article that claims another infraction is required to initiate the process. Also, if that were the case, the requirement to present ID when questioned would already be sufficient - you can’t get ID without being a legal citizen in AZ, no? In that case all that was needed was a law stating that immigration law would be enforced at the state level if an infraction was noted.
Oh good, then I don't have to bother to get my drivers license renewed. I've always hated those pictures and if we don't have to give our "papers" to the police when we're stopped for a ticket, then I won't need a license.
“Oh good, then I don’t have to bother to get my drivers license renewed. I’ve always hated those pictures and if we don’t have to give our “papers” to the police when we’re stopped for a ticket, then I won’t need a license.”
Nice job on completely missing the point. You get pulled over (in theory at least;) because you’ve already violated the law. There’s well established precedent that in those circumstances you must present ID.
Being forced to present ID strictly on the whim of the police without any legal infraction is “a bridge too far”, IMO.
Interesting that you cite CNN in your defense. I also note that the first several attempts just to get the text brought up dozens of links to protests, disallowals refutations and other anti-SB1070 diatribes. Then I found this link: http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/central/story/Is-federal-immigration-law-different-from/1ZdAAkpg-U6oVELk47QVBw.cspx?rss=1977
The text can then be linked from that. The article appears to conclude what I said and to refute what you are alleging. Who is your source?
You must be really, really ugly. lol
If your assumption is valid, no one can be elected Governor of Texas without pandering to the Hispanic population.
My wife is English and has been a legal alien in the United States for 35 years. From the time she arrived here, she was instructed to ensure that she carried her green card .. her alien registration card .. with her at all times. To the best of my memory, I believe that the card itself carries the statement that it will be carried at all times.
So all the Arizona law is doing is reaffirming the federal laws? So what's the problem?
Here is the actual law:
B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
25 PERSON’S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).
Lawful contact is required though not defined.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.