jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (4 posts)

Is Senate Bill 1070 Constitutional?

  1. J@ps profile image77
    J@psposted 7 years ago

    What is your take on this Tough Arizona Immigration Bill?

    And also on the new language they put in due to the "backlash" they have been getting so far.

  2. profile image0
    Ghost32posted 7 years ago

    I'm one of the 70% of Arizona voters who favor SB 1070 (which, by the way, is no longer a "bill" but a "law").  Why?  Because we're being overrun with criminal activity.  Just one example:  2009 assaults by illegals on Border Patrol officers was up to an average of more than three per DAY, an increase of 46% in just the past year. 

    It also seems a bit remarkable to me that most of the protestors around the country are screaming in fear and rage yet have not actually read the language of the law--they prefer a "preemptive strike" to attempt to nullify the law before it can even be implemented.  Which is of course their right, and good for them.  Any opinion is better than apathy.

    The new language?  It doesn't seem likely to have much impact one way or the other...with one highly significant exception:  When (not if) this law ends up being argued before the Supreme Court of the United States, the change in language MIGHT give it a better chance of coming out on its feet instead of in a body bag.

    There's one term that's B.S. for sure, and that's the description of SB 1070 as "this TOUGH Arizona Immigration Bill".  It isn't tough at all...but it's seen that way by a lot of loud folks, so perhaps that's good enough.

    1. J@ps profile image77
      J@psposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, it was signed into law, thanks ghost32 for correcting me.

      And I agree with what you say over 70%, and you are correct most people will do things out of the spur of the moment or go with the flow without really considering if what they heard was true or not.

      Let us read the entire "law" first and then figure out for ourselves if what was said about it was true or not.

  3. SettleEstateLI profile image54
    SettleEstateLIposted 7 years ago

    It is our position that that while this law is on the face intended to provide economic protections that U.S. businesses do have a right to, namely the unfair competition caused by businesses who can pay less for labor by hiring illegal aliens.  Paying less for illegal aliens hurts U.S. citizens, because of lost job opportunities and lost tax revenue.  The housing market is also hurt because those hired without proper documentation cannot use their wages to buy real estate easily.  They won't be able to buy real estate easily for two reasons: low wages paid to illegal immigrants, and paperwork difficulties involved with a real estate transaction involving identification.

    However, this bill paves the way for discrimination based on appearances because racial profiling will certainly be used by some officials to determine whom to screen for immigration status.  Surely hispanic-appearing persons will be the most likely to be checked, while eastern European illegal immigrants may go unnoticed because officials may tend to assume that the European illegals are citizens due to their white skin color.