Why it is Patriotic to Side with Cities that Boycott Arizona
You too can make uninformed decisions
After carefully studying the Arizona immigration law, Senate Bill 1070, I have concluded that the bill is discriminatory, inequitable, unethical, and pregnant with racial profiling mandates. After an exhausting session of cogitating, examining, perusing, and pondering, this is the only conclusion available to this quasi-learned person.
Now of course I did not actually read the bill with my own eyes; what I did was follow the examples displayed by the erudite leaders of this country, delegating my scholarship to the press, magazines, blogs, and the general word on the street. If our president, Barack Obama, can sign a 2700 hundred page health care bill based on anecdotal propaganda gathered by various people possessing incorruptible decadence, and if Eric Holder can delineate the Arizona immigration law and issue apocalyptic prophecies in infinitesimal degrees without ever reading the bill and instead relying on hearsay, and if Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security, can claim that "That's not the kind of law I would have signed... I believe it's a bad law enforcement law," without reading one page of the 10 page bill by relying on a jejunely calculated postulation based on intelligence gathered from La Raza pamphlets, The National Enquirer, and The View, then I hereby proclaim myself a renowned expert on the Arizona immigration law by intellectual proxy. Based on my indolently gathered intelligence, I must proclaim solidarity with the cities of San Francisco, Los Angeles, West Hollywood, and Oakland, all from the wistfully insolvent state of California. But an honorary position among these patriotic enclaves is warranted for the Phoenix Suns. Since I have not actually read the immigration bill in question, I thought we could read it together, staring at the demonic scrawlings with our collective jaws agape. I plugged the following words into Google: immigration law, racial profiling, oppressive states, and discrimination. The following treatise is the fruit of my sleuthing. Notice how in the first sentence, the state is compelling all municipalities within the state to cooperate with federal immigration law, and forcing all law enforcement agents to check legal status by questioning immigrants and demanding to see their papers. The reprobate:
- (a) Every law enforcement agency shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.
- (b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following: (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status. (2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States. (3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.
- (c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.
- have the means to sustain themselves economically;
- not destined to be burdens on society;
- of economic and social benefit to society;
- of good character and have no criminal records;
- and contributors to the general well-being of the nation;
- immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
- foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
- foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics;
- foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
- foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
- those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
ARTICLE 8. ENFORCEMENT OF IMMIGRATION LAWS
- A. No official or Agency Of This State Or a County, City, Town or Other political subdivision of this state may limit or restrict the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
- B. For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person's immigration status determined before the person is released. The person's immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States code section 1373(c). A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution. A person is presumed to not be an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States if the person provides to the law enforcement officer or agency any of the following:
- A valid Arizona driver license.
- A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
- A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
- If the entity requires proof of legal presence in the United States before issuance, any valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification.
- E. In the implementation of this section, an alien's immigration status may be determined by:
- A law enforcement officer who is authorized by the federal government to verify or ascertain an alien's immigration status.
- The United States immigration and customs enforcement or the United States customs and border protection pursuant to 8 United States Code section 1373(c).
-
Resolute readers do charge forth with our crusade against the state of Arizona, as the plenitude of evidence against Arizona has been manifested by my stalwart enterprise. Unfortunately, I have yet to read the snippet above, as I have become infirmed with physical exhaustion and mental lethargy as a result of this production. If anyone can peruse the above Arizona law and locate the obvious mandate for racial profiling, discrimination, and the various other pernicious verbiage, please note it and pass it on to me so I can be informed.
Read next: Judge who blocked Trump’s sanctuary cities order sided with Planned Parenthood in baby parts scandal
View Comments
Jim Byrd——Bio and Archives
Jim Byrd is a conservative writer of constitutional law and politics, with a couple of political satires thrown in per month. Jim generally challenges constitutional law articles that are misleading or just completely wrong.
