(1) Arizona is improperly passing laws regulating immigration, a subject reserved to the federal government to regulate; and
(2) Arizona is requiring its officers to enforce federal law, which is not permitted.
Claim (2) is almost certainly wrong. At least two federal circuits have found that state law enforcement has an “inherent power” to enforce federal law.
Claim is incorrect as well, in my opinion, but there’s a good argument to be made for it. I think if the law is found unconstitutional, it will be on this reason, generally called “preemption.”
You appear to be quoting an older text of the bill, not the current version. The phrase “any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of this state or a law enforcement official or a law enforcement agency of a county, city, town or other political subdivision” no longer exists in the law.
The amended language is:
So this means reporting crimes may be done without fear of coming under the ambit of this bill.
No. I may not have to worry about being deported if I report a crime, but I still have to worry about that pesky headlight not working!
Really, I don’t know what the answer to this whole mess is. I was reading last night - don’t remember where, sorry - that illegals as a percentage of population are under represented in the prison system. (I had heard this before, but never bothered to look up stats.) They try very hard to stay under the radar. Does this mean they should be ignored? Of course not. Laws were broken. Consequences must be paid. I do know that the Border Patrol is very active in apprehending illegals and they deport lots of people! (241,000 in 2009, according to a local news station) I’m just not sure that I want my local cops to be part of that business.