We are relieved that on Monday the Supreme Court blocked some provisions of SB1070, Arizona's extreme anti-immigrant law, but we're deeply concerned about the part of the law that has been upheld: Section 2B, which requires law enforcement agents to check the immigration status of anyone they stop for any minor infraction. Section 2B will lead to widespread racial profiling and will be an enormous setback for the rights of women, families and children.
Our organizations are the co-conveners of an initiative called We Belong Together, which brings together women and youth from all walks of life to call for policies that protect families and communities. We Belong Together has led Women's Human Rights Delegations to the states that have enacted the most draconian anti-immigrant laws: Arizona, Alabama and Georgia. In all of these states, we have heard from immigrant women whose human rights have been violated, yet who are courageously raising their voices for a society that ensures justice and dignity for all.
Wherever we have traveled, we have seen that laws like SB1070 enable local law enforcement to engage in racial profiling. We have heard about roadside checkpoints in Latino communities. We've heard of Latino drivers being repeatedly pulled over for minor or invented violations. We've heard of neighborhoods where residents are stopped almost daily by police who have targeted them. In Arizona, Alabama and Georgia, anti-immigrant laws are legitimizing racial profiling. This profiling is tearing families apart and is violating women's and children's most basic rights.
Racial profiling has a widespread chilling effect, and women and children are the most deeply impacted by these policies. Yet women are also the leading voices for change. As women from all walks of life, it's up to all of us to demand an end to laws like SB1070, and to ensure that our society will uphold the values of inclusion, equal protection, and family.
Follow Ai-jen Poo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/aijenpoo
Azadeh Shahshahani: Immigration Detention Conditions in Georgia Run Afoul of Human Rights Standards
South Asians fear racial profiling over US court ruling
If Obama's DOJ didn't make Racial Profiling as a complaint in their lawsuit against the State of Arizona ~ then why are you?
From opening interviews of the State of Arizona & Obama's DOJ before the United States Supreme Court ~
"
As Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr. stepped up to the plate in Wednesday's oral arguments about Arizona S.B. 1070, Coach Chief Justice John Roberts offered a similar warning from the bench.
Their exchange, (from the Supreme Court transcript):
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Before you get into what the case is about, I'd like to clear up at the outset what it's not about. No part of your argument has to do with racial or ethnic profiling, does it? I saw none of that in your brief.
GENERAL VERRILLI: That's correct.
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Okay. So this is not a case about ethnic profiling.
GENERAL VERRILLI: We're not making any allegation about racial or ethnic profiling in the case.
So why the awkward exchange about subjects not covered in this case? SCOTUSblog suggests that Chief Justice Roberts may have been covering his bases and "head off criticism that, if the Court did allow Arizona to enforce S.B. 1070, the Court was not endorsing racial or ethnic profiling.""
http://blogs.findlaw.com/supreme_court/2012/04/theres-no-ethnic-profiling-in-arizona-sb-1070.html
You just wrote an entire article based on a fallacy rooted in lies and propaganda. The opposite is in fact true. S.B. 1070 expressly prohibits racial profiling. Per the express language of the law, police "may not consider race, color or national origin in implementing the requirements of this subsection (A.R.S. § 11-1051(B). In addition, S.B. 1070 provides that these provisions of the law “shall be implemented in a manner consistent with federal laws regulating immigration, protecting the civil rights of all persons and respecting the privileges and immunities of United States citizens." A.R.S. § 11-1051(L).
The problem, however, is that the addition of the provision suggests that the state of Arizona acknowledges the possibility for racial profiling. It knows it will lead to racial profiling... that's why they added the provision, to cover themselves against litigation.
AZ police has alleged that it has given police training in regards to this issue. However, training to prevent racial profiling has been found to be totally ineffective in preventing racial profiling. This is particularly the case when you have cops, who have a image of what an undocumented immigrant looks like, tasked to identify possible undocumented immigrants.
Nice try, but SB1070 (or whatever is left of it) gives cops the power to tap into their preconceived notions of what an undocumented immigrant looks like to determine the legality of those they stop. There's no provision that can stop this from happening.
I'll do ya one better. Since 89% of all illegal immigrants in the U.S. are from south of the border with over 60% from Mexico (pew hispanic center data), why don't we REQUIRE ID checks for any individual stopped by police who: can't speak english, has no verifiable ID, can't tell you their address or where they work, can't give you a real SS#, and who changes the name they give you every time you ask.
Illegal aliens are not super villains who melt into society and become undetectable. They stick out and because they have been emboldened by the president's promises of amnesty, they aren't even trying to hide from authorities or prosecution. Hell, they're having parades in front of the ICE headquarters. Its not really profiling when they're all in a mob waving signs in support of breaking the law and standing outside your office.
The reality: Police who stop drivers (mainly) or those committing crimes to provide that they are in the country legally.
Law enforcement officials in Arizona have made the issue of racial profiling mute. They ask everyone they stop, not just Latinos, not just African Americans, not just Caucasians, not just Asians, everyone. You cannot have racial profiling if everyone is asked.
And by the way ... if you are driving and do not have a driver's license ... you deserve what you get.
*To Trini, the fact that you are driving illegally means that you commit misdemeanors every time you do so. If you are involved in an accident, how exactly will you pay the other party if you are at fault? You are the epitome of irresponsibility.
*To Catherine, the fact that you were separated from your parents for 3 whole months pales in comparison to the 12 to 18 months I have been separated from my son while I was on deployment overseas. You get zero sympathy. You also get the option of going with them once you become 18 if not sooner.
*If Alicia is an illegal foreign national ... talk to Trini.
*To Elvia, You get zero sympathy form me. You're here at your own risk.
I live in CA; CA probably has 800,000 that fit Obama's qualifiers. In my 30 years owning a "risk" management firm I found that governments in general underestimate numbers that pertain to cost and overestimate numbers that pertain to revenue.
On topic; you are right... in car with friends in AZ, pulled over for speeding and all passangers were asked for ID. This whole idea of not having a valid ID...not being able to show who you are if you're stopped by the police for a valid reason is absurd.
In LA, Jamiel Shaw, good student high school athlete, murdered by Pedro Espinoza because Jamiel was Black and wearing Red. Espinoza, an illegal immigrant gang banger was released back into the commuity on an illegal weapons charge by the LA County Sheriffs Dept. the day before murdering Jamiel. Immigration laws are to find out who people are before they arrive in the US, not after the fact.
“Sua Sponte”
75th Regiment
Company O
3rd Brigade
82nd Airborne (’66 -’73)
What is she doing driving a car with no license and insurance? Putting us all at risk and her children. She's already illegally in the country, now illegally driving around a school zone. How can you feel sorry for her. She knew she was illegally in the country why did she have children? If she's deported that's on her, she rolled the dice when she crossed a international border illegally, when she's caught, who's to blame, no one but her, Next time don't have children.
If the law allowed or even encouraged racial profiling why didn't the justice department use that in their case? They did not mention it. Racial profiling according to YOUR justice department, not mine, is therefore, not an issue. They made it an issue after they got out of court. That is hypocritical and dishonest. But with this Justice Department to be expected. They are just a political wing of the Democratic Party. Racial profiling is a made up issue by liberal racists who hope to divide the country. This is the only way they have a hope to win in November. They are getting absolutely desperate.