From the California Bar Act:
The State Bar of California shall require that an applicant for admission or reinstatement to the practice of law in California, or may require a member pursuant to subdivision (k) or (l) of Section 6068, be fingerprinted in order to establish the identity of the applicant and in order to determine whether the applicant or member has a record of criminal conviction in this state or in other states. The information obtained as a result of the fingerprinting of an applicant or member shall be limited to the official use of the State Bar in establishing the identity of the applicant and in determining the character and fitness of the applicant for admission or reinstatement, and in discovering prior and subsequent criminal arrests of an applicant, member, or applicant for reinstatement.
Wait a minute, In Maryland: the Act you cite asks for fingerprinting in order “to determine whether the applicant or member has a record of criminal conviction ... and in discovering prior and subsequent criminal arrests....” Isn’t that the crux of the matter? Someone can stand up and identify himself as an illegal alien, as someone who is in flagrant and constant violation of federal law — and he has so little fear of arrest (much less conviction) that he is willing to appear in court to demand his “rights.” All it would take to end this farce is a federal agent willing to arrest this person. The fact that this arrest — enforcement of the law when someone advertises his lawbreaking — almost certainly will not occur is what makes this absurdity possible.