Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kabar

“Under the provision, Arizona law enforcement officers may arrest lawfully present immigrants for crimes committed outside the state”

Huge problems with section 6.

I thought you said this was about controlling illegal immigrants, not legal ones. AZ can arrest legal immigrants for breaking their own laws. TX can arrest legal immigrants for breaking TX laws.

I disagree with you that 6 was a core component. It doesn’t even touch illegal immigrants whatsoever. It does however, grant AZ unconstitutional powers over naturalization.


363 posted on 06/25/2012 8:59:24 AM PDT by JCBreckenridge (Texas, Texas, Whisky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies ]


To: JCBreckenridge
I disagree with you that 6 was a core component. It doesn’t even touch illegal immigrants whatsoever. It does however, grant AZ unconstitutional powers over naturalization.

Unconstitutional powers over naturalization? Where did you come up with this nonsense? Here is what Section 6 of AZ SB 1070 says:

This section authorizes state and local police officers to arrest immigrants without a warrant where “probable cause” exists that they committed a public offense making them removable from the United States. (Note: “probable cause” means having enough evidence of unlawful activity to obtain a warrant or make an arrest.) Under the provision, Arizona law enforcement officers may arrest lawfully present immigrants for crimes committed outside the state, or for crimes for which they were previously incarcerated, if the commission of such a crime is grounds for deportation.

From Kennedy's opinion "Section 6 of S. B. 1070 provides that a state officer,“without a warrant, may arrest a person if the officer has probable cause to believe . . . [the person] has committed any public offense that makes [him] removable from theUnited States.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §13–3883(A)(5) (West Supp. 2011). The United States argues that arrests authorized by this statute would be an obstacle to the removal system Congress created.

As a general rule, it is not a crime for a removable alien to remain present in the United States. See INS v. Lopez16 ARIZONA v. UNITED STATES Opinion of the Court Mendoza, 468 U. S. 1032, 1038 (1984). If the police stopsomeone based on nothing more than possible removability, the usual predicate for an arrest is absent. When an alien is suspected of being removable, a federal officialissues an administrative document called a Notice to Appear. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a); 8 CFR §239.1(a) (2012).The form does not authorize an arrest. Instead, it givesthe alien information about the proceedings, including the time and date of the removal hearing. See 8 U. S. C. §1229(a)(1). If an alien fails to appear, an in absentia order may direct removal. §1229a(5)(A).

The federal statutory structure instructs when it is appropriate to arrest an alien during the removal process. For example, the Attorney General can exercise discretion to issue a warrant for an alien’s arrest and detention “pending a decision on whether the alien is to be removedfrom the United States.” 8 U. S. C. §1226(a); see Memorandum from John Morton, Director, ICE, to All Field Office Directors et al., Exercising Prosecutorial Discretion Consistent with the Civil Immigration Enforcement Priorities

Can you show me anywhere what this has to do with naturalization? FYI: I have issued immigrant visas and my wife is a naturalized citizen.

372 posted on 06/25/2012 9:33:40 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson