Now a chief deputy from AZ just told Chris Matthews that the only time they can stop someone

[jenmito]

is if they're doing something wrong ALREADY-like speeding. Chris didn't even question him on that-he just took it from "what happens from there." Chris missed the whole reason the law is un-Constitutional-that someone can be stopped for "reasonable suspicion" which can be ANYTHING-not only breaking the law. :eyes:

[babylonsister]

1. Also, even if they show a drivers license, they can still be sent to

an ICE facility. Exhibit A-this guy had to send his wife to get his birth certificate:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=459104&mesg_id=459104

[jenmito]

2. Jeez-so this guy even lied about THAT! HE said that showing a driver's license

would be enough to "send him on his way." Yeah, right.

[O is 44]

3. If that is the case then why the need for a new law? Cops

already stop people who speed. I hate it when these talking heads let the stupidest arguments slide by with out further questioning. This is the main reason the propaganda machine rolls on without interruption. Sheesh

[jenmito]

4. Good question which Chris should've asked. "Hardball"? Not always.

And the guy even SAID they're just following laws already on the books. He got NO questions about that.

[harkadog]

7. The law is an enforcement law not a policy making law.

The law allows state and local law enforcement to enforce federal laws already on the books. The law doesn't bring in new legal standards. Everything in the AZ law is already in federal laws.

[jenmito]

9. "Arizona's Immigration Law Likely Doomed in Court"

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/26/arizona-s-immigration-law-likely-doomed-in-court/

[ashling]

5. That is what I had heard previously

and it sounded like a pretty reasonable interpretation. So I read the text of the bill the other day to clear this up....and, BTW, like many here who also read the bill and already posted their impression of this, I, too, am a lawyer ...

I can see how someone could make this interpretation - if they read, maybe the first couple of pages. However, the bill makes "trespassing" a state crime. Under the law, "trespassing" consists of being on private or public property in Arizona. Since all property is either a) private, or b) public, that means anywhere in the state.

So, in addition to things like speeding, turning the wrong way onto a one way street, wreckless driving, etc., etc., for which they can be legally stopped, add one more: being there

I once got a ticket in Va for not wearing my seat belt. This was just after the law went into place, and for the first few monts it had the requirement that in order to be ticketed for speeding, there had to be "reasonable suspicion" that you had violated some other crime. The cop contended that I had stopped beyond the line at a stop sign.

My contention was that if he had actually had reasonable suspicion that I had violated some other law, then he should have ticketed me for that too. He didn't. Why, because I hadn't violated any law.

But that didn't stop him.

[harkadog]

6. Reasonable suspicion is not un-Constitutional.

It has been the legal standard in the U.S. since Terry v. Ohio (1968) and no serious legal scholars have questioned it.

[jenmito]

8. Really? So what IS reasonable suspicion? And many serious legal scholars have

questioned it. Is reasonable suspicion the kind of shoes you wear like one Repub. said?

[harkadog]

10. I would guess the one Repub. is not in law enforcement.

Officers are trained in the subject and there are very few legal challenges in the courts to the standard. (Admittedly most people affected by reasonable suspicion stops don't have the money to file challenges and public defenders have too few resources to go on legal crusades).

[jenmito]

14. I posted a link to an article saying why it's most likely UNconstitutional. As others have

posted, reasonable suspicion of a CRIME is a lot different than reasonable suspicion of being an undocumented worker.

[harkadog]

15. Our candidate for governor in Arizona

Terry Goddard wants to make being an undocumented worker a felony. It will sure be a crime then.

[awoke_in_2003]

18. because, if their skin is brown...

that is reasonable suspicion :sarcasm: (just in case)

[sabrina 1]

11. Reasonable suspicion that a crime might be

about to or has been committed, is a lot different than suspecting whether or not someone 'looks like an American'. Is it a crime not to 'look like an American'? And how do you decide who does and does not 'look like an American'? This leaves cops in charge of deciding that momentous question. And if a citizen who does not 'look like an American' is stopped and produces his ID, that won't help. He will have to produce his birth certificate which most people do not carry around with them. So, he will be detained until someone can go find it for him.

If a cop thinks that people who look like foreigners, dark-skinned eg, don't look like Americans, he is now ordered to stop and detain them until they prove him wrong.

This is why this law is un-Constitutional. This is why it is being called the 'papers please' law.

The laws already on the books cover the 'reasonable suspicion' problem. This law goes way beyond that.

[Zynx]

12. Reasonable suspicion of being an illegal immigrant implicitly targets certain racial groups.

This is different than reasonable suspicion of being drunk.

[Empowerer]

13. That was already the law - if what he claims is true, why did they need the new law? n/t

[treestar]

16. That's how it reads

I read it and got the impression you had to be stopped for something you could be stopped for anyway. But then they have to check your immigration status. So if you are stopped and can't produce a driver's license, you must be an undocumented alien. An undocumented alien who drives is driving without a license, an infraction anyway.

It would be so expensive to enforce this law. People who could be let go with a ticket to pay end up detained. Which could include legal and citizens who don't have a driver's license. And any white person who doesn't have the DL on them ought to be detained as well, I wonder if that will happen. :sarcasm:

[awoke_in_2003]

17. well, we all know what DWB means...

I guess we have a new one- SWB (speeding while brown). This law is nothing but xenophobic bullshit.