If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
I had no idea the legislation was being considered in the mitten, but it's about damn time. I'm sick of the Canucks swimming over and stealing our jobs.
Posted on 07/17/2010 12:59:42 PM PDT by COUNTrecount
Arizona's not alone.
Five states have introduced similar immigration laws since The Grand Canyon State passed controversial legislation that is scheduled to kick in on July 29, according the Los Angeles Times.
The number of immigration-based laws and resolutions supported by states has increased by more than 10 times in recent years.
"Lawmakers are frustrated with federal inaction," Ann Morse, a program director with the National Conference of State Legislatures told the newspaper. "Until the federal government acts, states will still see this as an area where they see the need to play a leadership role."
The group says officials in five states—Michigan, South Carolina, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island—have introduced similar immigration laws to Arizona's.
The legislation, which has sparked protests by civil rights and religious groups, mandates that immigrants carry documentation of their status. It also requires police to question people about their immigration status if the cops have "reasonable suspicion."
Critics say the law could lead to racial profiling. Supporters argue the law is necessary because the federal government hasn't done enough to curb illegal immigration.
A federal judge began hearing arguments last week over whether the law should be enacted later this month as scheduled. There are seven challenges in total, including one by the U.S. Department of Justice, to the law.
Several states already have their own regulations regarding illegal immigrants. Colorado bars undocumented workers from obtaining in-state tuition. In Tennessee, knowingly presenting a fake ID to get a job is illegal. And in Nebraska officials must confirm immigration status in order to receive public benefits.
And more Americans wouldn't mind an Arizona-like immigration law in their own state, according to a recent Quinnipiac poll. Voters said by 48% to 35% that they'd support similar legislation.
Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute predicted the Arizona law would be a factor in the November elections.
"The Arizona immigration law has emerged as a major divide in the country, but the numbers are on the side of those supporting it," he said.
Ping!
My biggest concern is the Michigan RINOs. I don’t expect much from the democrats but the GOP holds the state senate which means nothing happens without them, good or bad.
excerpted from The Philadelphia Inquirer, June 27, 2010...
Philadelphia is expected to end the arrangement that permits federal immigration agents to scrutinize the city's computerized list of arrests, including country of origin and other data, deputy mayor for public safety Everett Gillison said Sunday.
Immigrant advocates say the year-old agreement between the city and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement service, known as ICE, has resulted in deportation proceedings against immigrants arrested on even minor charges. Under the agreement, ICE agents can routinely access the city's Preliminary Arraignment Reporting System, known as PARS. That agreement is up for renewal on Thursday.
"It is the mayor's view that the PARS agreement should not be extended," said Gillison, speaking at a South Philadelphia church meeting attended by more than 300 immigrants and their supporters.
Mayor Nutter has expressed concern about the human rights of all immigrants, regardless of their legal status.
In a directive he issued a year ago, he barred municipal employees on official business from inquiring about the immigration status of any person, including, but not limited to, victims, witnesses, arrestees and detainees.
The only sane portion of article...
Mark Medvesky, a spokesman for ICE in Philadelphia, said he could not comment in detail about the city's intentions regarding PARS until it takes formal action.
But he did say, "Our priority is convicted criminal aliens, getting dangerous people off the street. That's one of the reasons we wanted access to PARS."
The MN legislature hasn’t been in session since May. The bill probably was written up, but won’t be voted on until next year. So there’s legislation but that doesn’t mean much until it passes both houses of congress and the Gov signs it.
Of course there’s not a peep of protest about illegal immigration from “Mr. Big” Schwarzenegger of California. There’s a few good reps here, but they unfortunately are outnumbered by the open borders/pro Mexico Dim politicians, even though illegals cost California billions every year.
Why am I not a bit surprised? Shakespeare said it best: Methinks thou dost protest too much.
Or some such pithy awesome words of wisdom!
Corral the illegals and make them pay.
Works fer ME!
Pa? Really? Cool. Brewer for Prez! The only Republican with balls!
In Vegas, there is no such thing as “truth in reporting.”
It usually takes months for something such as this to play out far enough for the media to get the story right.
Metro has a reputation for being hard-nosed, and they need to be with the crime that is here. But they have no right to go off half-cocked.
I make no apologies for Metro; I make no apologies for the media. Neither are my responsibilities. But I do pray for the innocent victims that are always on the scene. It’s all I can do.
The rest is up to God. He alone can sort things out.
“The bill probably was written up, but won’t be voted on until next year.”
If The Democrats manage to retain control of the state House and/or state Senate, this bill will never see the light of day. It’ll be sent to committee - and from there, nothing will happen.
..and I still can’t believe it’s not being introduced in Texas yet. Of all the states, I thought they would try to adopt it.
Michigan, South Carolina, Minnesota, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
I had no idea the legislation was being considered in the mitten, but it's about damn time. I'm sick of the Canucks swimming over and stealing our jobs.
Don’t forget the hockey trash talk and their SNOW MACHINES!
It just hit me. Am I crazy for thinking that the main reason the Federal Government is filing this lawsuit against Arizona to keep certain facts and records out of public view until after the elections?
Damn Canuckistanis.
You are onto something there. Good thinking.
Last week the Gov. of RI was on Fox news saying RI put a law as close to AZ’s in 2006, and has been challenged several times, and struck down every time. I have not read the law, but living in RI, I have only heard of one instance where anyone in government questioned someone based on profiling, and it turned out on the side of the government.
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.