April 26, 2010

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer did sign the immigration bill into law. Earlier in the day, Obama called the immigration bill "misguided" and told the Justice Department to examine the bill to see if it's legal. He also said that the federal government must enact immigration reform at the national level so that it doesn't leave the door open to "irresponsibility by others." He continued, "That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe." Oh snap!

The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund said it plans to legally challenge the law. The president of The National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders Legal Defense Fund said that his group is preparing a federal lawsuit against Arizona to stop the law from being applied. Mexico warned that the proposal could affect cross-border relations. The day before the bill was signed into law, the Mexican Senate unanimously passed a resolution urging Governor Brewer to veto the law. Guatemala's Vice President Rafael Estrada said the law is a step back, and Guatemala's Foreign Relations Department said the measure "threatens basic notions of justice."

The law will take effect in late July or early August (though, if there are legal challenges, it might get pushed back). Governor Brewer ordered the state's law enforcement licensing agency to develop a training course on how to implement the law without violating civil rights. She said, "We must enforce the law evenly, and without regard to skin color, accent, or social status. We must prove the alarmists and the cynics wrong." First of all, "alarmists" and "cynics"? Who is she kidding? It reminds me of a quote by George Bernard Shaw: "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." Second of all, what is this fantasy world she's living in? So they're going to enforce this law -- demanding proof of citizenship for those they view as suspicious -- but they're not basing it on skin color, accent, or social status? Why do I highly doubt that? This law is intended for a certain population -- don't act like it's anything else. They most definitely will be looking at skin color, accent, and social status. And if they didn't, they'd essentially just be asking everyone for proof of citizenship. Governor Brewer is just trying to silence criticism. She is up for a tough re-election battle -- so she's getting her conservative points in for being tough on immigration, for blaming the federal government for inaction, and heralding the power of the state. Meanwhile, she tries to act like this law won't be about racial profiling. But that's what the bill is and always has been about. They act like the purpose of this law is safety -- that these immigrants are all dangerous criminals that are here to kill white people and sell drugs -- but, I think, it's really just about them not wanting immigrants in their state. It's about race. It's about class. It's about preserving their state and America as the way they want it (which is unrealistic, outdated, and naive). This is what the bill's sponsor, Rep. Russell Pearce (R-Mesa), said about the legislation, "We'll have less crime. We'll have lower taxes. We'll have safer neighborhoods. We'll have shorter lines in the emergency room. We'll have smaller classrooms." Now, to me, it doesn't sound like he's most concerned about crime; it sounds like he's most concerned about entitlement. (Full Story)