Arizona "Papers, Please" Law May Hit Tech Workers 1590
dcblogs writes "H-1B workers and foreign students may think twice about attending school or working in Arizona as a result of the state's new immigration law. If a police officer has a 'reasonable suspicion' about the immigration status of someone, the officer may ask to see proof of legal status. Federal immigration law requires all non-US citizens, including H-1B workers, to carry documentation, but 'no state until Arizona has made it a crime to not have that paperwork on your person,' said immigration lawyer Sarah Hawk. It means that an H-1B holder risks detention every time they make a 7-11 run if they don't have their papers, or if their paperwork is out of date because US immigration authorities are behind in processing (which condition does not make them illegal). The potential tech backlash over the law may have begun yesterday with a call by San Francisco City Atty. Dennis Herrera 'to adopt and implement a sweeping boycott of the State of Arizona and Arizona-based businesses.'"
Re:Quite reasonable (Score:1, Informative)
Actually, first they have to have a reason to stop you (e.g. traffic violation).
Uh... contradictory? (Score:5, Informative)
Federal immigration law requires that all non-US citizens, including H-1B workers, to carry documentation, but 'no state until Arizona has made it a crime to not have that paperwork on your person,'
So it already was a crime.
The real news is a state is now making an effort to enforce the law, since the executive branch of the federal government has quite clearly failed to fulfill their constitutional duties on the matter, in regards to enforcing the US borders.
Re:Quite reasonable (Score:5, Informative)
Appearing reasonably white is no protection. [mcclatchydc.com]
Re:Quite reasonable (Score:5, Informative)
US Citizens too (Score:5, Informative)
US citizens can also be stopped and asked for their papers too, and can be arrested, and held until they can prove their citizenship [crooksandliars.com].
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:2, Informative)
Standard for Foreign Travel (Score:1, Informative)
When you are visiting a foreign country, you always need to have some paperwork showing you status. That applies to every country that I've visited except, perhaps Canada. While in Canada, I don't really feel like I'm in a foreign country, so perhaps it is because there isn't a language barrier that I feel comfortable. I dunno.
In all the other countries (Europe, Japan, China, Costa Rica, Panama, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico), I've been told to carry my passport with the VISA inside. Usually, I leave the passport in the apartment or hotel safe and carry a photocopy of it and the VISA I'm traveling under. In most of those countries, my appearance and dress target me as a foreigner, so it is very easy to pick me out.
Ok, so you are a non-permanent resident in the USA. Why wouldn't you carry "your papers with you?" Seriously?
So what? (Score:4, Informative)
When I visit Canada, China, etc. If I don't have my passport with me, and an official requires it of me I could be detained and eventually handed off to my government to get new papers or explain to them where my papers are located.
Re:Bienvenidos a libertad (Score:2, Informative)
En libertad, como los pajarillos.
En libertad, que nadie me pregunte: a dónde vas?
You sound suspicious -- Show me your papers.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Arizona is just enforcing fed law:
(d) Every alien in the United States who has been registered and fingerprinted under the provisions of the Alien Registration Act, 1940, or under the provisions of this Act shall be issued a certificate of alien registration or an alien registration receipt card in such form and manner and at such time as shall be prescribed under regulations issued by the Attorney General.
(e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d).
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-8289.html
If we are not going to enforce the laws, take them off the books.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm a US citizen. I'm not required to carry papers.
Re:Uh... contradictory? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:4, Informative)
And that guy was stopped by the ICE (a federal department, not state) doing the job they always do. Funny how it's suddenly a problem. More sensationalism at work.
Re:Yay! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
So, really, fuck you Arizona - through no fault of my own, you feel entitled to detain me because of the failings of the government system? Because I can't get documentation of my status?
Blah.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
It's already written into the bill... they need a REALLY good reason to suspect you; they are not allowed to "suspect" you do to skin color, race, or country of origin...
Now proving what their suspicion was in court may be difficult, but you'd better believe it'll be the first question out of the court appointed lawyer's mouth.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Given that the US is a country of immigrants and therefore anyone and everyone looks like an immigrant, police can detain you until you prove that you are a citizen.
I'm a native-born US citizen of Italian descent who is frequently mistaken for a Latino, even by actual Latinos who come up to me and start speaking Spanish. I also travel through Arizona on a fairly regular basis. I will be curious to see if I'm ever asked to prove my citizenship. Sure hope I'm not going to have to start carrying a passport to in order to keep from being shipped to Mexico.
Showing a drivers license will suffice. One of the rumors floating around about this bill is that everyone will theoretically have to carry a birth certificate or citizenship papers with them, but that's not the case. The police will ask for a form of ID first... which they routinely do during things like traffic stops anyway. In my state, there are random sobriety checkpoints set up where state troopers will ask to see your license and registration and ask if you've been drinking. And they've been doing this for decades. So it's not like Americans have never had to deal with the inconvenience of police asking for ID before.
Re:Uh... contradictory? (Score:3, Informative)
It seems Arizona does have a "stop and identify" law which requires you to state your true full name.
However it doesn't seem to require a legit citizen to also show ID. Could be a bit of a nuisance if a citizen, not driving, running over to get a coffee then head back to their home, has cops harassing them because he isn't white. You know it will happen.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Bienvenidos a libertad (Score:4, Informative)
It mirrors the requirement that immigrants carry papers, but that's not the issue. The part that's problematic is that this law allows cops to ask anyone that they interact with to show their papers, whether they are required to have them or not.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:3, Informative)
What does this law have to do with Tea Party? Please read the "Contract From America": http://www.thecontract.org/ [thecontract.org] almost 1/2 million tea party supporters have voted and those ARE their priorities. Do you see anything to do with immigration in it?
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:4, Informative)
The case you link explicitly notes that the person in question was not required to carry or produce papers, only to identify himself verbally. The opinion makes pretty clear that they were upholding Nevada's "stop-and-identify" statute on the understanding that the "identify" part included no requirement to produce ID:
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:3, Informative)
While I don't like the law at all, to be fair, it does appear to explicitly say that a currently valid AZ driver's license is to be taken as sufficient evidence of citizenship for the purposes of these kinds of stops.
That does seem to leave a problem with out-of-state driver's licenses. I've driven through Arizona many times, with my only identification being a TX driver's license (I don't generally carry my passport or birth certificate when driving around the U.S.). If I'm stopped on suspicion of being a non-citizen, will my TX license be taken as sufficient? The law doesn't appear to guarantee it would be, so there's the possibility that, if I'm detailed while driving through Arizona on I-10, I could be held by the police for a day or two while I get someone to overnight-mail my passport. Makes me somewhat wary of driving through Arizona.
Re:Teabaggers??? (Score:3, Informative)
Leaving your homosexual intentions behind, this law will be found legal under the 10th amendment. The AZ law carefully mirrors federal law, it does not call for the round-ups you liberal national socialists dream about.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:4, Informative)
And what if you can't prove it? At one point, for a period of about 6 months, I was unable to get a state ID in either of the states that I lived and worked in, because the state I was born in would not give me a copy of my birth certificate without my already having an ID issued by a state or the federal govt.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
You left out the best part!
Unlike suspects charged in criminal courts, detainees accused of immigration violations don't have a right to an attorney, and three-quarters of them represent themselves. Less affluent or resourceful U.S. citizens who are detained must try to maneuver on their own through a complicated system.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:4, Informative)
Why don't you look at (for example) Arizona's legal requirements for getting a driver's license. I'll admit it took me a whole 30 seconds to get them on Google. Having a legal license from the State of Arizona does actually prove that you are either a citizen or legally in the country, because that is the only way that Arizona will issue a license to you. Idaho is the same way; no birth certificate, no green card, no legal papers = no license. So, is it completely foolproof, no. You could get your license with faked documents, or just a fake license, which just adds to your crimes, but a legal, valid license certainly does imply your legal status.
Travellers life (Score:1, Informative)
I always have embassy certified paper copies of several ID-papers with me.
It is stored together with critical phone numbers and other information that might be handy.
Me, my wife, and our biological child are born on three different continents. We currently live in a very different part of the world than the birth place of any of us.
Travellers tip: Shit happens. Be ready.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:3, Informative)
So in other words you can stop someone and demand papers, and if the person was an illegal immigrant, the stop was OK, but if the person was a citizen, Whoops! it was illegal to do?
No! According to this law, it is NOT OK to simply stop someone and ask for papers. RTFL
Do you see the problem with this?
Do you? Did you six months ago? You should have because the Feds have the same powers this bill spells out and more. All this did was give AZ state police some of the powers Federal agents have. If the feds weren't abusing it, why do you think the locals will?
No state has had too (Score:1, Informative)
because federal law already stated people under immigration law were already qrequired to have their papers. Don't blame Arizona for federal law.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:4, Informative)
I went through the TN-1, H1-B, GC process, and always had proof of status on my person. I still do.
And I was born in the United States, yet I do not have a proper birth certificate...
What's your point? That a single datum makes data?
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe you should read the Arizona law. Maybe the Arizona law tells you. Maybe reading things before commenting on them / bitching about them is just good practice. What do you think?
Arizona Revised Statutes Section 2, 11-1051 (B) ... 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:
1. A VALID ARIZONA DRIVER LICENSE.
2. A VALID ARIZONA NONOPERATING IDENTIFICATION LICENSE.
3. A TRIBAL ENROLLMENT CARD OR OTHER FORM OF TRIBAL IDENTIFICATION.
4. A VALID UNITED STATES FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT ISSUED IDENTIFICATION.
If I were in another country illegally... (Score:1, Informative)
If I were in another country illegally, I think having my ID checked and getting tossed out on my ass would be the best I could hope for.
What the hell is it people don't get about "Illegal Immigrants"??? The word "Illegal" is right there for christsakes!!!
I think it's pretty damn pathetic that my friends that own a house here, and follow the letter of the law in their travels to and from the US, are treated like criminals every time they land, but people are beating their chests over people that are f'ing CRIMINALS!!!
If I break the law, I get punished.. If a person is here illegally, breaking the law, people want to throw them a damn parade.
My great grandparents on both sides of my family came over right before and right after WW I, LEGALLY... The obeyed the law, they learned English. They got steady work and paid taxes.. Why should people too crooked to do the same get any special treatment? Hell, why should they get to take any shortcuts when there are many that are here legally? What example will we be setting? What precedent will we be setting???
I think it's past time for me to hop on my sailboat and leave, and flip the bird as I go.. The US is beyond help if the majority of people are too stupid to get how f'd up this debate is.
no such thing as "illegal immigration" (Score:5, Informative)
For states that are not on the border, immigration may not seem like it's a bad problem
It's pretty sad when even people who oppose illegal migration fall into this trap.
Immigration is not a problem; immigrants pay, are productive members of society, and get deported if they break any laws.
The problem is illegal migration. Illegal migration is not immigration. Stop confusing the two.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Because only the federal government can make laws about immigration, according to the US constitution.
According to an AZ lawyer friend, this law won't last 15 seconds in court before its invalidated.
The US constitution provides that: ...and a bunch of other stuff.
1) The "Papers Please" part of the law is unconstitutional. If you refuse and are arrested, you can most likely sue for breaches of civil rights, regardless of AZ law.
2) AZ has no constitutional authority to pass this law.
3) It violates the 14th ammendment.
Between laws banning the antichrist (actually Im not sure if thats AZ, but lol if it is), the nutty "president must have birth certificate" (Hmm, yes I'm SURE AZ has the authority to make federal election laws) and this, plus the fact that Sherrif Arpaio *STILL* isn't in Jail for massive breaches of every god damn law regulating police powers and police brutality ever concieved, AZ is apparently a pretty embarassing place to be a lawyer right now.
Re:Teabaggers??? (Score:3, Informative)
As usual people on the left who don't know anything about the Constitution assume it says things it doesn't say. The law is constitutional - it doesn't give Arizona authorities any powers federal police don't already have.
You forget our other laws... (Score:4, Informative)
> They CANNOT walk up to a random person on the street and check their immigration status.
Wrong. We have a stop & identify statute. They can use that to check on anyone they want.
See also: the sweeps that are performed whenever our sheriff is up for reelection.
Re:checks and balances, sue and cash in (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:2, Informative)
It's not racist to embrace my Hispanic, Japanese, and Chinese friends who have *obeyed the law* and acquired Visas or Citizenship.
I welcome them to this country. Vice-versa, neither is it racist to remove those who did NOT follow the law & invaded our land without permission. We are a Republic, not an anarchy. The Law rules. In ALL cases.
Re:Federal law already requires documentation (Score:2, Informative)
Citizens generally don't carry documentation around with them.
Do you carry a driver's license?
That's all you need.
Read the law. [azleg.gov]
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:2, Informative)
While it is true that it is a big problem in those states, acting like a Nazi is not magically going to fix it. The false presumption that making a police state will fix all of your problems always does more harm than good. Seriously, just placing everyone in jail is not about to fix anything.
How would I fix it? Make it easier to get to those states legally, because if they have to work for at least minimum wage and pay taxes then you are in a situation a hundred times better already. The problem is that racism keeps them from becoming legal, and as long as it is hard as shit to become legal, the problem will persist, because they will come to America either way.
The only real difference if whether you are going to be racist and destroy your own economy, or work with the reality of the situation to actually make the best of a bad situation.
I find your +5 interesting mod to be absolutely BS, because it is not insightful, it is basically you just whining about your problems and using them as an excuse for racism and Nazi-like behavior, instead of being a responsible citizenry and actually working towards a real solution. And if there are as many illegals as you say, do you really have the prison capacity to deal with all of them? If you are rounding up people as if you were herding cats, and throw them all into the prisons, you will very quickly see the error in your logic.
So yes, I will scream racist, because not only is it racist, but it is lazy, ignorant and flat out wrong. America is a free country, it was once the land of the free and the home of the brave, not it is the home of the ignorant land of the racist.
In any decision there will be debate, and I can tell clear out that this is going to be a massive drain on resources, lead to higher crime, drive up taxes and hurt the economy. Arizona is digging their own grave with the shovel of racism, and they are lying in it too. They could look for a way to solve the problem, but hate seems to feel better for them.
I have no sympathy for such idiocy.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:You forget our other laws... (Score:3, Informative)
Except your stop & identify statue only asks someone to identify themselves AKA "My name is X Y." NOT prove their identity which would violate the 4th amendment. Read the majority opinion in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada [wikipedia.org] the only reason your stop & identify statute was considered constitutional was because of the slim scope of it. Now that the scope have been expanded expect it to be ruled unconstitutional.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
I live in Miami, a city with one of the highest percentages of Hispanics in the country. Most crime in my area is committed by Russians. Despite your assertion, study after study has shown that Hispanics, and illegals in particular, are far less likely to be criminals then the over-all population. This makes sense, if you're illegal, you don't want to rock the boat and get yourself deported. See http://www.amconmag.com/article/2010/mar/01/00022// [amconmag.com] . To quote:
"Nearly all of the most heavily Latino cities have low or even extremely low crime rates, and virtually none have rates much above the national average. Eighty percent Latino El Paso has the lowest homicide and robbery rates of any major city in the continental United States. This is not what we would expect to find if Hispanics had crime rates far higher than whites. Individual cities may certainly have anomalously low crime rates for a variety of reasons, but the overall trend of crime rates compared to ethnicity seems unmistakable."
"And with double digit unemployment I'm really fucking sick of jobs like construction, which used to be filled by hard working Americans that actually paid taxes"
From a pure fiscal point of view, there wasn't a chance in hell that construction workers were net tax payers. Illegal immigrants don't receive EITC, Medicaid, or food stamps, and still pay sales taxes. Not only that, put the money saved accrues to owners, who probably pay taxes on it at a pretty high rate. Not only that, but from what I understand, illegals work with fake SS numbers, and so their paychecks are automatically withheld. But because they're not actually tax payers, they don't get the refund that anyone working in construction would be entitled to.
Also, because of the housing burst, there is a huge surplus of housing. If I remember correctly, Arizona has enough houses to last for another 15 years. You know what would create more construction jobs? Population growth! Which also boosts demand by creating more potential customers, creating jobs for everybody in every sector...
"Hell it is so fucking bad here that guys yell "Immigra!" in front of construction sites for a joke. Yell Immigra around here and you can watch an entire job site turn into a ghost town in seconds, they just scatter like fucking deer."
They scatter like *people* trying to feed their family. It's perfectly fine to oppose illegal immigration, but the immigrants themselves are nearly all just hard working people trying to create a better life for themselves. Dehumanizing and mocking them isn't necessarily racist, but it's fucking cruel. To paraphrase the Bible, "Be kind to immigrants, remember that you were once a slave in Egypt".
"So until the fed gets off their pandering asses and actually does something about the borders the states are gonna have to step up. If you don't like it, don't go there! That is one of the nice things about having 50 experiments in democracy, if you don't like one state's laws you are free to move."
No. Arizona gets far more money from the federal government then they pay in taxes, as well as billions of dollars in defense related pork, and in exchange for that, they have to follow basic standards with regards to treating their citizens. If they want to succeed, then fine. But if they start violating central tenants of our constitution and national values, then they better expect to be slapped down by our courts and federal agencies.
"So scream "racist" all you want, I don't give a fuck. I've known too many folks that have lost their homes and are living barely better than animals because all the non McJobs have been given to illegals, whom the owners can treat like shi
Re:checks and balances, sue and cash in (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe you should read the law [keytlaw.com]? I've seen a whole ton of FUD from racist groups like La Raza out there, and none of it is based on any reading of the law itself.
The law makes specific provision to allow officers the leeway to not worry about immigration in the case of witnesses, etc: "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. "
Secondly, it establishes quite clearly what the police are looking for:
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:
1. A valid Arizona driver license.
2. A valid Arizona nonoperating identification license.
3. A valid tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification.
4. 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.
Your quote: "...but you speak with an accent...":
Law text: A law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state may not solely 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.
The law is pretty clear: the trigger for "lawful contact" is the occurrence of something meeting Terry Stop standards. What the police are looking for is what they are legally allowed to ask for anyways at such a stop.
Now if you have problems with a specific section of the law, please point the section out? I've provided the text of the law for you, fully linked above.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:5, Informative)
Why aren't anyone punishing the employers who are enabling these illegal immigrants? Why aren't you throwing them in prison for violating the law? [...] Change these charges from misdemeanors to felonies. Throw the responsible parties in jail (including the illegal immigrants), from foremen to CEOs, single citizen hiring maids, gardeners, nannies etc.
As a small business owner, I think you are asking an awful lot.
Employers are not Federal Immigration Officials. We simply don't have the ability to determine someone's residency status beyond what we already do (and apparently ICE doesn't do such a stellar job, either [mcclatchydc.com]).
Don't get me wrong, I have no desire to hire illegals, and I fulfill my requirements with respect to the I-9 form. But if an applicant
And do you really verify the immigration status of everyone who works on your property? Would you even know how to? My Hispanic maid, handyman, and gardener are business owners, so I remit payment directly to a business (i.e. no I-9 or 1099s need to be completed). I'm guessing that they are legal, but I have no way of knowing for sure, and no way to check.
I guess where I'm going to with this ramble is that employers are not Government Immigration Officials. Tell us what you want us to do, and we'll do it, but don't get upset when employees figure out how to circumvent the system.
Re:What about the presumption of innocence? (Score:3, Informative)
Nope, you just get detained until they find your paperwork. Which is actually worse than being fined. At least you can contest a fine in court.
If you can't or won't provide information that identifies you as a citizen of the United States to the police and you have no valid government issued ID on you, you may be detained until your identity can be confirmed. That's just common sense. If you don't want to deal with that inconvenience, either keep a valid government ID with you or be willing to provide identifying information which can be used to verify your citizenship.
Does it require US citizens to carry their paperwork with them under threat of detention?
No, and neither does the Arizona law. However, in BOTH cases, if you're reasonably suspected of being in the country illegally and have no ID to show otherwise, you can most certainly be detained. In fact, Federal law enforcement can ignore IDs if they still don't believe you. The Arizona law grants special protection to those who have valid government IDs when said ID has a legal residency requirement attached to its issuance. If you're going to be questioned by someone in Arizona after this law takes effect, you best hope it's Arizona police operating under the new law. With them, you whip out that driver's license and they go away. With ICE, you could have your license, Social Security card, and even a birth certificate on hand and they can STILL drag you in until you can convince them that you aren't an illegal so long as you're within 100 miles of the border.
If anything, you should be arguing for the Feds to adopt the Arizona law's protections. Arizona's legislature went out of its way to correct potential abuses brought to light by ICE. Arizona's law is not intended to target citizens or legal residents and it shows that by creating a huge exemption from suspicion for anyone with valid government issued ID. Illegals who want to avoid problems could potentially get forged IDs. Arizona law enforcement won't be able to put them under the microscope unless they have reason to believe the ID is forged. ICE can simply drag them in and sort it out on their own time.