The Governor and the President disagreed. She invited him to the border; he walked away. The issue is Arizona SB1070.
The arguments are nonsensical. Arguments against Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 (S.B. 1070) assume all Arizona law enforcement officers are irrelevant, bigoted…or both.
One insists illegal immigration be only enforced from Washington.
Another insists local police will discriminate against the innocent.
On December 23rd, 2011a report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) examined Arizona’s (SB 1070) that allows state and local police to ask subjects about citizenship on routine stops. CRS reports on the validity of an injunction that blocks Arizona’s enforcement of SB1070 while awaiting Federal District Court findings on the Law’s constitutionality. (Manuel, 2011) (http://fulltextreports.com/2011/06/28/crs-state-efforts-to-deter-unauthorized-aliens-legal-analysis-of-arizona%E2%80%99s-s-b-1070/
The U.S. Supreme Court will review SB 1070 within six months.
Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice (DOJ) has challenged Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070 and sued the State on grounds that immigration control is exclusively a Federal responsibility.
Holder’s DOJ argues criminal behavior is who asks you, not what you do.
The Supreme Court has said otherwise. In 1968, Terry v. Ohio, the Supreme Court said the Fourth Amendment permits a law enforcement officer to stop and briefly detain a person when the officer reasonably suspects the person has committed a crime. Reasonable suspicion may not be based on a hunch, but instead upon “specific reasonable inferences which (the police officer) is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his experience.” (Terry, (1968)
In 2010, Section 2 of Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070, was amended by Arizona House Bill 2162 to address the racial profiling issue. HB 2162 said that, during a lawful stop or arrest by Arizona or local police, law enforcement may determine the person’s immigration status, if “reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien …unlawfully present in the United States.”
Tucson Police Chief Villasenor said enforcement of S.B. 1070 would lead to constitutionally impermissible “racial profiling.” by his police officers. www.justice.gov/opa/documents/declaration-of-roberto-villasenor.pdf
SB 1070 does not prohibit law enforcement relying on ethnic background when asking about immigration status. But Arizona’s H.B. 2162 adds law enforcement may not consider the race, color, or national origin when determining “reasonable suspicion” a person is an unlawful alien, “except to the extent permitted by the United States or Arizona Constitution.”
Further, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer issued an executive order requiring all Arizona law enforcement be trained on enforcement of S.B. 1070. The order is intended to “provide clear guidance to law enforcement officials regarding what constitutes reasonable suspicion, and shall make clear that an individual’s race, color or national origin alone cannot be grounds for reasonable suspicion to believe any law has been violated.”
The Governor and President are left with two common sense questions:
How can a criminal act only be a crime to certain police?
How can police ignore certain appearances in specific crimes?
Manuel, K. et al. (2011). Congressional Research Service. State Efforts to Deter Unauthorized Aliens. Legal Analysis of Arizona’s SB 1070. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41221.pdf
Terry v. Ohio. (1968). 392 U.S. 1. Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Ohio. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZS.html