Have any of the protesters and hand-wringers and professional troublemakers all heading to Arizona to defend righteousness ever bothered to read the law?
Not that it matters: no matter what the law says, this is a chance to pontificate and protest and wax righteous against The Man. And maybe get on TV. So screw what the law actually says!
Still, if they’d read and consider Arizona’s new law, they might find:
“I think the critics who are claiming the bill will not withstand legal challenge need to read the bill,” said Kris Kobach, a law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.
“The bill will withstand any preemptive challenge,” he said, because it reinforces existing federal immigration laws and creates no new immigration crimes.
And Byron York says:
Has anyone actually read the law? Contrary to the talk, it is a reasonable, limited, carefully-crafted measure designed to help law enforcement deal with a serious problem in Arizona. Its authors anticipated criticism and went to great lengths to make sure it is constitutional and will hold up in court. It is the criticism of the law that is over the top, not the law itself.
I’m no expert, but if York’s description of the Arizona law is accurate, then it isn’t all that different from current Wisconsin law. As I understand it, law enforcement in Wisconsin is allowed to inquire about the immigration status of any person they’ve legally contacted for any other reason. The person is under no obligation to respond – that may be a difference – but law enforcement can ask, and can check immigration status with federal authorities.
Arizona: slightly more anti-illegal than Wisconsin!
Via Memeorandum.
Comments are closed.
>Has anyone actually read the law?
Little known fact: the last legislation from the end of the 110th Congress outlawed the reading of all laws at Federal and State levels.
Legislators are now limited to writing and emoting concerning their feelings about laws.
shoot nice story man.