Janet Napolitano says that Arizona’s new immigration law is misguided
This is a mobile post, please excuse any lack of proper formatting that may exist. Hopefully the link I provided will work.
As we all know by now, Arizona has passed a new “controversial” immigration law. Apparently it is “controversial” because they actually call it a crime to be in this country illegally. That doesn’t seem to be too controversial to me, upholding the law seems quite the opposite. The fact that Arizona had to pass a law to declare an illegal act illegal in the first place is what I find disgraceful, but neither party has been willing to tackle this issue in a way that would satisfy the American people and so Arizona had to tackle the issue on her own.
Now that Arizona has done just that, the reaction from Barack Obama has been swift, calling the law “misguided.” And now Janet Napolitano has seconded that language and agrees that the law is misguided. She is now claiming that illegal immigration is a security issue and on that point I agree. But naturally I disagree with her on the answer. She feels it is necessary to “get illegals right with the law.” In other words change the law and grant the illegals amnesty. If you ask me, that is controversial; Arizona’s law is not.
Illegal immigration is probably going to be the next issue that Barack Obama tackles, and if it wasn’t before Arizona’s new law probably ensured that it would be next. Here again we have another issue in which the president holds a position that is at odds with the vast majority of the American people. If Arizona’s law does nothing else it will highlight the differences between people like Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano and the American people.
The American people consider the idea of upholding the law as being common sense, while Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano consider it “misguided.”
America's Watchtower 
Well, I don’t begrudge Arizona the right to act on its own after so many years of neglect from Washington. Democratic administrations have been characterized by conservatives as being hopeful of getting the votes of illegals if they can make them legal somehow, and Republicans have been characterized as carrying the water for the many employers throughout the nation that employ and exploit illegal aliens, who have nowhere to go for justice when they’re exploited or abused. So Arizona threw its collective hands in the air and said, finally, “Enough. We’ll do it ourselves.”
The only part of the Arizona law that really troubles me is the provision that permits law enforcement officers to ask people for their papers for no reason other than the officer’s intuition.
Arizona law presently requires legal resident aliens to carry their alien registration cards, as I understand it. So if a trooper stops someone on suspicion of being illegal and asks for ID, and they produce a green card, they’re okay. But what if the person has no ID? Is the assumption going to be that the person is illegal? What if the person is a citizen? American citizens aren’t required to carry identification. It’s anathema to us. We’ve all seen movies representing the German Reich as a place where the Gestapo would harass innocents by demanding their papers.
People who are driving a car are required to carry their operator’s permit, which should be sufficient identification for such purposes, but if they’re just walking the street, no ID is required of US citizens.
Now, if Arizona were to pass a bill requiring all its residents at all times to carry identification sufficient to prove that they’re in the country legally, there’d probably be some grumbling from the liberals, but there’d be much more grumbling from the conservatives and libertarians. That’s unfortunate, but our society was founded on the concept of equal treatment under the law, and this law looks as if it’s going to open the door to disparate treatment of those who look and sound different.
What this provision appears to me to be, and I know I’m not alone, is a pretty blatant violation of the rights of some Americans that’s currently being tolerated by other Americans because they think it won’t inconvenience them. It does this by essentially requiring anyone who looks Latino to carry their papers and produce them upon demand, even if they’re a citizen.
Don’t misunderstand or try to put words in my mouth, or attempt to characterize my remarks for anything they aren’t. I’ve got no problem, for example, with proof of legality being required of anyone picked up for any other purpose – loitering, jaywalking, breaking and entering, whatever. Especially caught in the act of coming over the border. But simply to stop and demand ID from someone on suspicion of having entered the country illegally at some time in the past carries with it such a potential for abuse that I think it ought not to be permitted.
LikeLike
Here is what the law actually says.
I understand there are concerns about law enforcement officers stopping people at random and asking them for their papers. I share some of that trepidation myself, but when do we say enough is enough? The opponents of this law say it is racism, that it will allow the police to stop any and all Hispanics, just to make sure they are legal. Do we not at some point have to trust our law enforcement officials and their judgement?
All in all, this law is being made out to be the open doorway to Gestapo like tactics and I question that assessement. Those who are in this country illegally are criminals, are they not? Why is enforcing the law against them a bad thing?
LikeLike
Hold on “Georgia Yankee”
If they are walking the street they will not be stopped will they?
I carry identification at all times you don’t? I have my wallet in my possession and in it is most of my identification , you do not?
“but there’d be much more grumbling from the conservatives and libertarians. That’s unfortunate, but our society was founded on the concept of equal treatment under the law, and this law looks as if it’s going to open the door to disparate treatment of those who look and sound different”.
Why conservatives and libertarians? looks to me as though the grumbling is strictly those of the left ideology. But then again it is the MSM telling me this, how bout you?
I am not latino and I am required to carry my “papers” at all times for proposes of driving , your not? why shouldn’t they? They will not be stopped for jaywalking and if they are then maybe we can identify illegals as the ones who DONT jaywalk.
“But simply to stop and demand ID from someone on suspicion of having entered the country illegally at some time in the past carries with it such a potential for abuse that I think it ought not to be permitted”
The law does not say you can stop anyone based on suspicion… where do you get that?
Only if they are in the process of committing some other crime and then only after just circumstances are met is there is adequate suspicion.
I assume ALL on this site recognize what we are seeing here.
A lesson in perception I am sure.
What are you getting paid to come here or something?
LikeLike
Maybe we both should stop and read all the facts before we post.
But then again maybe we would not find a reason to post at all after we had all the facts.
Thing is after reading your other posts I see I was premature and judgmental to an other wise sincere poster.
My apologies for accusing you of being astroturf Georgia Yankee
But Dam your original post pissed me off
LikeLike
Hey there, Rick.
The point I was making was about legal requirements. I do carry ID, but unless I’m driving, I’m not required to, nor do we require ot of any citizen just for walking about.
There are many great cities in our land where people live their lives without ever getting a driver’s license.
At any rate, let’s see how this unfolds in Arizone, and meantime let’s see if the national government can get its act together enough to gain control of our borders enough so that we can look at the newest incarnation of “immigration reform” without everyone getting giggling fits. After all, “reform” implies that you’ve got some level of control over whatever it is you’re reforming, doesn’t it?
Take good care, and may God bless us all!
LikeLike
I agree Steve… Arizona has simply given more “teeth” to a Federal law that has not been enforced. And as for Obama’s comments, I think he is misguided at best. What I really think can not be put on your blog. Americans are being murdered and abducted and he want’s to watch the law makers in Arizona closely, instead of watching the border closely.
Yankee – I think your comment is politically correct, but we count on our police officer’s intuition all the time so that should not even be an issue. And right now the US-Mexico border states need to do something. The bigger issue is not with illegals coming into American to work, it’s with the gangs killing and intimidating Americans. If we can cut down on that crap then the local officers will not need to be stopping as many people.
LikeLike
Georgia Yankee, I understand the consern people have with the idea of pulling people over just for “looking illegal” but from what I understand the police do need a reason to stop the person in the first place.
Today it is 40ish with a rain/snow mix in New Hampshire, but it is 85 and sunny here in Florida. So the weather is perfect here. Thank you for asking.
LikeLike
Well, after LD’s posting of the relevant legalese, I’m more inclined to sit back and see what comes of this. I’m sure we’re all aware that there are law enforcement personnel who’ll try to twist this law and use it to justify random stops, just as we’re aware of law enforcement officers who are models of integrity and honor, and use this law as the legitimate tool it was designed to be. I’m pretty comfortable with the legalese as written – let’s leave it to Arizona to make the best of it.
By the way – Sean Hannity today pointed out that this legislation isn’t really new law, just an attempt by Arizona to enforce existing law. Interesting – and accurate.
Windy and cool here in Atlanta.
LikeLike
Good comments everyone.
I understand your concerns GY, but something needed to be done and the federal government has refused to take this issue seriously enough. Arizona did what they felt was needed. As Larry and USA Watchmen said, at some point you have to have a little faith in law enforcement to do the right thing.
LikeLike
Steve, when you say the federal government has ignored the situation, you’re being very generous and charitaqble to the federal government. I already pointed out that this is a long-time problem that’s been permitted to fester for years by administrations of both parties.
I still don’t like the “stop and frisk” component of the bill, but thanks to LD for finding and posting the relevant legalese. It sounds from that as if there has to be some level of interaction between a trooper and the “suspect,” before the trooper’s allowed to ask for papers.
I was thinking, when I wrote the other piece, about how much we really do rely on the intuition of law enforcement personnel, and thanks to USAWatchmen for pointing it out. At the same time we have pretty strict rules of evidence, and I’m not sure “Well, your honor, the dude just sort of looked, you know, illegal!” is going to pass legal muster in court.
And scoff all you want, but I still think that if the problem were Canadians pouring illegally over the Montana and North Dakota borders, conservatives wouldn’t be nearly so quick to tolerate legislation that permits (or even mandates)!) law enforcement to use their intuition to determine who may or may not be here legally.
Steve: hope your vacation’s going well, and the weather’s treating you right!
LikeLike
Nope keep those Canadians out… just kidding. I would have the exact same problem with ANY border where Americans are being intimidated and murdered. That’s what has really sparked this law from Arizona.
LikeLike
Boortz is talking about this with this example – a trooper stops a car speeding north, ten miles from the border, crammed full of Mexicans.
Under current law the trooper’s permitted only to ask the driver for ID, but not any of the other occupants.
I’m with Boortz on this example – I think the trooper should legally be permitted to find out what’s going on, and ask all the occupants of the car for ID. That’s a clear-cut case of expecting law enforcement to follow through on intuition.
The problem for law enforcement is this – what if they’re all US citizens, but only the driver has ID?
The problem is that Arixona’s been put in the position of having to clean up after the national government’s failure. It just has to be easier to patrol the border better and keep illegals out, than it is to try to weed them out from a largely Latino population once they’re in. It’s the national government’s job to keep illegal aliens out, and they’ve failed miserably at it.
LikeLike
I think you all covered all the bases really well, so I will just say I agree with you all!
I’m really glad Arizona did this. One of the reasons I left Arizona was the crime. It was horrible. They need to get the illegal issue under control for safety issues, especially for the police. Three police officers were killed in the 10 months I lived there!
I carried mace with me everywhere and I don’t normally do that. You always had to be mindful of everything around and you and everyone around you. Add to that identity theft. BAD. Mine was stolen 3 times in those 10 months and to this day I have no idea how.
I’m really impressed that this governor has the spine to stand up and do what is right. Obama can puff his chest and flap his wings all he wants. She is right and he is wrong.
LikeLike
I almost always carry proper identification (retired military I.D. card and driver’s license, as a minimum) with me in my wallet…whether I’m walking down the street or driving a car…so I don’t have any problem with being approached by law enforcement and asked for identification. First of all, I’ll UNDERSTAND what t…hey’re saying, and, being a PROUD AMERICAN, would be glad to show that I AM AN AMERICAN.
Seems to me that the only ones scared of Arizona’s ‘proper identification’ law are CRIMINALS (illegal undocumented foreigners)…so if one is PROUD to be an American, show your IDENTIFICATION!!!!!
IF you’re not proud to be an American OR if you’re a CRIMINAL, you deserve to be locked up.
GO, SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO!!!!!
LikeLike
You’ve obviously not been stopped and asked to produce your ID very much, have you?
If I’ve done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide, then law enforcement personnel don’t have any legitimate reason to interact with me whether or not I’m carrying my ID, have they?
This was a big issue in New Jersey a while back – one fellow testified before the Legislature that he’d been stopped over fifty (yeah – 50) times while driving his gold BMW, after dark, in an upscale neighborhood. He was never charged with anything, and finally sold his car for something a little less ostentatious. But it’s pretty clear what got him stopped – he’s black, and the cops had decided that a black man driving a nice car in an upscale neighborhood after dark was suspicious.
He was as proud as anyone of his Americanism, and carried his ID, but he told the legislature that it got to be very old very fast.
It’s the realization that this sort of “enforcement” of the law is possible that concerns many of us – the idea that legal residents, tourists and American citizens can be made to feel unwelcome in their own home.
Take good care, and may God bless us all!
LikeLike
You’re right…I have not been asked to my ID very much here in the U.S. or anytime during my 10 years overseas in Spain and Turkey or during my two separate month-long Eurail vacations throughout Europe or my two vacation trips in Syria or in my three trips to Samara, Russia. AND, I’m a non-white to boot!!!
If you ask me, DWB (driving while black) is an idea devised to further polarize BLACK and WHITE and continue dig at the SCAB of slavery.
Being stopped by law enforcement is not a bad thing…if you’re WHITE or any other color than BLACK and drive in “some” neighborhoods, you’d be lucky if you didn’t get shot at or run off the road and then shot…especially if one insists on his/her “constitutional right” (?) to drive in certain particular neighborhoods AFTER DARK.
What’s the expression? “Discretion is the better part of valor.” (loosely quoted)
LikeLike
NO ONE should be “afraid” to be stopped and show an I.D. Either you have one, or you don’t. Your legal or illegal. Janet Nap. is misguided.
LikeLike
The standard in this nation is simple and longstanding: citizens aren’t required to carry identification, period. Drivers are required to carry proof of their authority to drive, but pedestrians don’t need identification to walk the streets.
Non-citizens are required to carry identification documenting their status.
It’s disingenuous to suggest that since nearly everyone drives, everyone should feel comfortable with having to produce identification. “Nothing to hide, nothing to fear” is simply bumper-sticker sloganeering that simply attempts to obscure the fact that citizens here aren’t required to carry identification. Period.
LikeLike
Very true USA Watchmen, that is what this bill was about. Protecting American citizens from the violence that has plagued them and after all isn’t that supposed to be one of the main purposes of the constitution? Arizona’s law does not single out any race but we all know it is aimed mainly at Mexicans who come here illegally, as well as anyone else who crosses that border illegally.
LikeLike
I am of South Asian origin. So far I have never been stopped by any Cop without a proper reason. I believe this law “will” give a police officer that right to stop me witout a proper reason. I believe I will be stopped without a proper reason just based on the way I look by some racist officer.
What will irritate me the most is that that racist officer gets paid by my Tax Money and the law has given him the weapon to harass me – that like me paying somebody to harass me! And on top of that, right that minute, my car may be getting vandalized because the cop whose job is to prevent that is busy stopping and questioning me!
Can anybody here guarantee me that there is no racist cops in the police force? who ever that is supporting this law, can that person guarantee that this law will not be abused by racist cops? Is there a legal recourse to challenge “Reasonable suspicion” of a racist cop? More than anything else, what is the cost of this enforcement in terms of spike in crimes that will happen when criminals understand that the cop is busy questioning illegals and not there to watch them?
Your answers for my question is much appreciated
PS – I got to this site when I was trying to seek answer to a question
“Are American citizens required to carry Identification?”
can any of you here guarantee that if I forget to carry my wallet when I go out for a stroll – I will not land up in a cell, just because of how I look?
There are many “correct ways” to identify and deport illegal immigrants – but this is not one of them and this comes at a cost of making “non Whites” feel like second class citizens.
LikeLike
Well, Krish, we’ve been made aware that the Arizona law enforcement community is undergoing some very careful and very public training to address just the concerns you raise. That won’t get rid of the racist officers that exist on every force, including where you came from, but I’m hopeful it will help to prevent the sort of arbitrary harassment that you and I have both expressed concern about.
I’m assuming that you’re a citizen. The law in the USA requires all non-citizens to carry identification documenting their legal status in this country. Once one is a citizen, though, regardless of language or looks, it’s not legally required to carry identification. If you’re stopped for some lawful reason – say, littering or jaywalking – and asked to produce identification and can’t, I’d advise you to alert the law enforcement officer of your name and address, and alert him or her that you are a US citizen. While you can be detained for breaking the law, you cannot be detained for not carrying identification if you’re a citizen, although it may be the case that they’ll hang on to you until they can verify the information you provide.
Don’t laugh about my examples – jaywalking and littering. I grew up in New York City, where jaywalking is more or less a rite of passage. I was stunned the first time I visited Dallas, TX, though, and saw the almost religious respect pedestrians had for the curb, and how they obeyed the commands of the police officers directing traffic. Ditto litter – some places view it with more concern than others.
Anyway, I hope things work out well for you, and I want to thank you for joining the many millions of immigrants who’ve voted with their feet to affirm this as the greatest nation in the world!
Have a glorious weekend and may God bless us all!
The Georgia Yankee
LikeLike
Very well said!
LikeLike
Hi Krish, I can not say that there are no racist cops, there are racists in all walks of life. But you claim you have never been stopped without a legitimate reason, even without this law a racist cop could have found a “legitimate reason” to pull you over if he felt like it simply based on your race, but that has not happened. The Arizona law requires cops to have a primary reason to stop you, they cannot simply stop you based on your looks. If you were simply going out for a stroll the cops would not have a reason to stop you. I think that you are being a little paranoid here, although that is easy for me to say being a white guy.
No, American citizens are not required to carry an ID card, but if we get pulled over driving and we do not have ID we will be fined.
LikeLike