Arizona's Immigration law: SB 1070 & HB 2162

[LWM]

Letter to LA: Boycott in the dark

PHOENIX -- Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce has suggested that if Los Angeles pursues a boycott of Arizona over its immigration law, Arizona could retaliate by taking back some of the electricity it generates for southern California.

In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Perce said he was "dismayed" by the vote of the Los Angeles City Council to boycott Arizona.

Pierce quoted from a Villaraigosa statement that the goal of the boycott was "to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars or the withholding of our dollars -- to send a message."

Pierce said that approximately 25 percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.

"If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements, so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation," Pierce wrote to Villaraigosa. "I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy."

Pierce said that people of good will can disagree over the merits of SB1070, the Arizona law, but, "A statewide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill."

The Arizona Corporation Commission regulates utilities, including the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix, the nation's largest nuclear plant. Southern California Edison Co. owns 15.8 percent of Palo Verde, the Southern California Public Power Authority 5.9 percent and the City of Los Angeles 8.7 percent.

Los Angeles gets about 6 percent of its electricity from hydroelectric power, most of that generated by Hoover Dam on the Arizona-Nevada border. It also gets power from some coal-fired plants in Arizona.

The new Arizona law, which has spawned controversy across the nation, requires local law enforcement officers to question the immigration status of anyone they stop for another reason and then have reasonable suspicion that the person is in the United States illegally.

[LWM]

LA County to boycott Arizona
by Associated Press (June 1st, 2010 @ 5:23pm)

LOS ANGELES - Los Angeles County is joining in the economic boycott against Arizona to protest the state's new law targeting illegal immigration.

After a heated debate, the county board of supervisors voted 3-to-2 Tuesday to ban new contracts with Arizona-based companies and review those that could be canceled. The county has more than $26 million in contracts with Arizona companies this year.

Other California cities, including Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco, have passed similar measures.

The Arizona law requires police enforcing another law to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are in the country illegally.

L.A. County Supervisor Gloria Molina says law ``goes too far.''

[LWM]

Legal eagle: SB1070 will survive challengesby Jim Cross/KTAR (June 3rd, 2010 @ 7:14am)

PHOENIX -- ABC legal analyst Royal Oakes believes Senate Bill 1070, Arizona's new immigration law, will stand up to courtroom challenges, although he says, "It's going to be a long drawn-out process."

The law, which takes effect July 29, is being challenged as unconstitutional and on grounds that it will lead to racial profiling as police ask the immigration status of people they have reasonable suspicion may be in the United States illegally.

When it comes to the racial profiling claim, Oakes said, "The bill could not be more clear. It bans racial profiling. Critics, however, say, `Well, okay, it's fine to ban it. But, if you're a police officer, don't you have the power now to stop -- say 90 out of 100 people -- as they drive by?`"

As for claims that it's unconstitutional, he said, "The Fourth Amendment guarantees against unreasonable searches and seizures. The 14th Amendment allows everybody equal protection and due process rights. Some people say that this law gives police so much power that, really, it tramples on those constitutional rights."

Oakes sees as the biggest challenge: "Does Arizona even have a right to pass a law like this or is it exclusively the power of the federal government to regulate immigration?"

[LWM]

Anger over Obama's meeting with Brewerby Associated Press (June 3rd, 2010 @ 6:04am)

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's planned meeting Thursday with Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer faces a protest from opponents of Arizona's new immigration law.
Opponents say the law, which Brewer signed, is discriminatory and say Obama isn't doing enough on immigration reform.

Brewer is to meet Obama at the White House, and opponents said they will hold a demonstration there to denounce the Republican governor, ``the discriminatory Arizona law she signed'' and ``President Obama's halfhearted leadership on immigration reform.''

Supporters of an overhaul of U.S. immigration law have accused Obama of not pushing Congress hard enough to pass immigration legislation. Some have said Arizona's law and tough immigration laws in other states are symptoms of a broken immigration system.

Arizona's new law, scheduled to take effect July 29, will require police enforcing any other law to examine immigration status if there is reasonable suspicion a person is in the country illegally. It also makes being in the country illegally a state crime.

Obama says the law is the wrong approach to illegal immigration and his administration is combing through it and preparing for a possible legal challenge. Brewer has been soliciting donations from the law's supporters to defend it.

In an interview Wednesday, Brewer said she hoped she and Obama could agree on solutions to improve border security.

Brewer said she wants to know how Obama's plan to deploy up to 1,200 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico will affect Arizona and what else he has in mind to tighten border security.

She said she'll make a pitch for her own proposal calling for more troops on the border, deployment of helicopters and surveillance drones and completion of a border fence.

The White House said it would lay out for Brewer the ``unprecedented resources'' dedicated over the past 16 months to secure the border.

[LWM]

Hispanics flee Arizona ahead of immigration law

By Alan Gomez, USA TODAY

Arizona's tough new immigration enforcement law is fueling an exodus of Hispanics from the state seven weeks before it goes into effect, according to officials and residents in the state.

Though no one has precise figures, reports from school officials, businesses and individuals indicate worried Hispanics — both legal and illegal — are leaving the state in anticipation of the law, which will go into effect July 29.

Schools in Hispanic areas report unusual drops in enrollment. The Balsz Elementary School District is 75% Hispanic, and within a month of the law's passage, the parents of 70 students pulled them out of school, said District Superintendent Jeffrey Smith. The district lost seven students over the same one-month period last year, and parents tell Smith the Arizona law is the reason for leaving.

"They're leaving to another state where they feel more welcome," he said.

The measure, signed into law April 23 by Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, requires a police officer to determine a person's immigration status if they are stopped, detained or arrested and there is "reasonable suspicion" they are in the country illegally.

About 100,000 illegal immigrants left Arizona after the state passed a law in 2007 that enhanced penalties on businesses that hired them, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Some early signs suggest another exodus.

Businesses serving the Hispanic community say business is down, signaling that illegal immigrants are holding on to cash in anticipation of a move from the state, said David Castillo, co-founder of the Latin Association of Arizona, a chamber of commerce for nearly 400 first-generation Hispanic business owners.

"(Brewer) signed the law, and everything fell apart," Castillo said. "It's devastating."

Jorge Vargas plans to move to New York City because his air-conditioning business relies mostly on Hispanics. "My business is completely dead," he said.

Juan Carlos Cruz, an illegal immigrant who has worked in plant nurseries for 20 years, huddled with dozens of relatives over the Memorial Day Weekend in the backyard of his brother's Phoenix-area home to plot out the family's next move to avoid what they say will be harassment by police. Virginia and California are the front-runners.

"If I were alone, I'd try to stay. But I have a family, and I have to find a place where we can live with more freedom," said Cruz, who hopes to move July 4 to blend in with holiday weekend traffic. "This is getting too hard."

Paul Senseman, a spokesman for Brewer, said it's difficult to gauge how many people are leaving because of the law, but he said he hears similar reports of people leaving the state.

"If that means that fewer people are breaking the law, that is absolutely an accomplishment," he said.

[LWM]

San Jose condemns AZ immigration law
by Associated Press (June 9th, 2010 @ 9:52am)

SAN JOSE, Calif. - San Jose officials have condemned Arizona's tough new law targeting illegal immigration but have stopped short of an economic boycott of the state.

The City Council on Tuesday voted 9-2 to denounce the immigration law, prohibit city employees from traveling to the state on official business and support legal challenges filed by other groups.

But council members said they didn't think a boycott was appropriate given the city's financial troubles.

San Jose has contracts with Arizona companies for garbage collection and stun guns that are worth millions of dollars.

Los Angeles, Oakland and San Francisco are among the California cities that have passed economic boycotts of the state.

Arizona's new law allows police enforcing other laws to question people about their immigration status.

[LWM]

Doctor questions AZ immigration law
by Bob McClay/KTAR (June 8th, 2010 @ 3:16pm)

PHOENIX -- Arizona doctors have questions about Arizona's new immigration law.

Dr. Lucas Restrepo of Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, outlined the worries in a letter published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Restrepo said doctors are concerned because the law "specifies that those who conceal, harbor or shield or attempt to conceal, harbor or shield a foreign person who came to the United States illegally are guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor."

If a doctor treats an illegal immigrant, Restrepo said, "someone could advance the argument that they are shielding or concealing that person."

Restrep said his job is to treat his patients.

"It is not my job to inquire about their legal status, their papers or whether they have violated any laws."

Restrepo said firefighters and paramedics are specifically exempt from the harboring provisions of the law, but doctors are not.

"Any physician has to protect his patients. If I'm going to go around asking whether they have violated the law, whether they are here legally or illegally, then I think I'm going to betray my intentions to help patients and to help people regain their health."

Restrepo added, "My job is very precise. I try to help a person get better. Whether they're criminal, whether they're law-abiding, whether they're a nice person or a terrible person, whether they're Republican or Democrat, I could not care less."

Restrepo said he has called several legislators with his questions, but has no answer on whether doctors, people who work in hospitals and other workers in the medical community are exempt.

[cico7]

Where is Arizona anyway? Isnt that near Iowa between Cuba and Puerto Rico state lines?

[cico7]

ACLU "Bust Card"

IF YOU ARE STOPPED FOR QUESTIONING:
Stay calm. Don't run. Don't argue, resist or obstruct the police, even if you are innocent or police are violating your rights. Keep your hands where police can see them.
Ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, calmly and silently walk away. If you are under arrest, you have a right to know why.
You have the right to remain silent and cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions. If you wish to remain silent, tell the officer out loud. In some states, you must give your name if asked to identify yourself.
You do not have to consent to a search of yourself or your belongings, but police may "pat down" your clothing if they suspect a weapon. You should not physically resist, but you have the right to refuse consent for any further search. If you do consent, it can affect you later in court.

IF YOU ARE STOPPED IN YOUR CAR:
Stop the car in a safe place as quickly as possible. Turn off the car, turn on the internal light, open the window part way and place your hands on the wheel.
Upon request, show police your driver's license, registration and proof of insurance.
If an officer or immigration agent asks to look inside your car, you can refuse to consent to the search. But if police believe your car contains evidence of a crime, your car can be searched without your consent.
Both drivers and passengers have the right to remain silent. If you are a passenger, you can ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, sit silently or calmly leave. Even if the officer says no, you have the right to remain silent.

ACLU Bust Card

There is more to it than this, see the rest of the article.

[LWM]

Burlington, Vt., council calls for AZ boycott
by Associated Press (June 15th, 2010 @ 6:06am)

BURLINGTON, Vt. - The Burlington, Vt., City Council is calling for a boycott of the state of Arizona because of a law that state passed that authorizes police to question people about their immigration status.

On Monday, the City Council voted 10-4 for the boycott of Arizona and Arizona businesses.

The vote was in response to a new law in Arizona that requires police to question a person's immigration status if officers have a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.

Supporters of the boycott filled the auditorium where the meeting was held.

The Burlington Free Press says the measure was supported by Progressive Mayor Bob Kiss and opposed by the city's three Republican councilors.