Yes, the person could be arrested at that point, because there is probable cause to believe he’s violated the law. The law requires that a permanant resident keep his green card with him at all times.
The cop could certainly choose to validate the status in some other way short of arrest.
Yes.
In just the same way that, before any reasonable suspicion is developed, the cop can say:
COP: Say, ou don’t have any drug, guns, rockey launchers, anything in the car I need to know about, do you?
DRIVER: No.
COP: Then you don’t mind if I take a look, do you?
DRIVER: Uh… OK, I guess so.
And when drugs are found, they are perfectly admissible and create probable cause for the arrest.
Same thing that happens here:
COP: Then you don’t mind if I take a look, do you?
DRIVER: Yes, officer, I do mind. I do not give you consent to search my car.
Nothing. Very few criminals do this, of course. Many many people are arrested because they feel that they have to say ‘yes’ to a search or they will arouse suspicion. But in reality, if the cop has probable cause to search and wants to, he will anyway. It’s only by asserting your rights that you avoid the consequence.
The same thing will play out here. To avoid charges of racial profiling, the wisest course of action will be for cops to ask everyone. And illegal aliens will get nervous, figure that if they say citizen they’ll be asked to prove it, and say something that leads to reasonable suspicion.
Same answer, except that I’d say the cop can slightly prolong the investigation. The general rule is that police detain under reasonable suspicion to confirm or dispel the suspicion.
So if we imagine that the suspect simply repeats, “I’m not answering that,” politely but repeatedly, and there’s no other evidence in play, then the cop will ultimately have to let the suspect go.
Just saw this video.
Brewer uses the fact that so many people opining on the law haven’t read it to her advantage. I think that 99% of political ads—from both sides—suck. But I think this one is a stroke of brilliance.
Uhhh… what?!?
Or in the alternative… what?!?
How many years have defense lawyers and advocacy organizations released pamphlets and videos about what your rights are when talking to police?
And yet I guarantee you that tonight, Saturday night, at least one person in almost every state in the country is answering “Yes,” to a cop’s “request” to search his car, knowing that there is contraband of some kind in it but still feeling he has to say yes because it will look too suspicious to say no.
So no, I absolutely reject your idea that the word will spread and everyone will know to answer “Citizen.” It just won’t work that way.
Or, if it does, we need to start massive naturalization proceedings, because the illegal immigrant population will have proven itself vastly smarter than the extant citizenship.
But it won’t.
Sure.
COP: By the way, are you a citizen, sir, or a legal resident?
SUSPECT 1: I’m not going to answer that.
SUSPECT 2: Mano, dile que eres ciudadano! (Bro, tell him you’re a citizen!
SUSPECT 3 (to SUSPECT 2): Callate la boca! Pueden chequear! (Shut up! They can check!
There’s reasonable suspicion.
What a smug response leading to such a disappointingly simplistic and sophomoric post.
You can’t honestly expect everyone who doesn’t agree with a state religion to be able to just leave. How’s that trying to leave thing working out for Mexican laborers?
So no, you didn’t read it.
And there is no relevance to your question now, since it has nothing to do with the hypotheticals that came before.
What do I care whether everyone can leave, or not? The question was: does the establishment of a state religion violate some core civil right of all humanity?
No, it doesn’t. Would I like it? No. So what? I don’t like you, but your presence on earth does not violate my core human rights, either.
reasonable suspicion of what? that he’s a citizen?
now can you do one when there isn’t a third party present?
In the states that I have lived in, no copy or imaging of my birth certificate was taken.
Why would they image your birth certificate? Your origin of birth is recorded and becomes part of your license record.
I don’t know if these are accurate or not. I post them in the hopes that someone from Dallas, or from the state of Texas, or someone familiar with the health care system at Parkland Hospital can speak to the validity of these numbers.
I am not one to post inaccurate information to support my side of a debate, but this landed in my email inbox today, and I wanted to post it to give you all an idea of what is out there.
These are from 2006. I wanted to confirm before posting them, but was unable to. I wanted to get these up because someone asked for some numbers, and I think this paints a pretty bleak picture of the situation in a border state. This was sent to me in an email, but I’m hoping someone closer to the situation at Parkland may have an idea if this info is close to the truth, or has been blown out of whack by folks wanting to make the situation look worse than it is.
The sources are supposedly the Dallas Morning News and the AP. Like I said, however, I have not been able to verify it as of yet. If someone reads this and knows the information to be wrong, please point out what is wrong and the source.
I am not posting this to inflame, but to provide a sample of numbers associated with the costs of illegal immigrants from a health care POV. If I am able to confirm these numbers, I’ll post a follow-up to this. (I will also post a follow-up if I find that this is bogus information). But I wanted to get it out here for consumption. If these numbers are cut by 50%, you can still see the financial burden associated with just one segment of the illegal immigrant problem.
The story emailed to me is between the “*” lines.
SFP
Apologies in advance if this story has been refuted or is incorrect. I didn’t have the time to confirm it properly tonight, so I’ll take the hit if it’s wrong.
Parkland Hospital is home to the second busiest maternity ward in the country with almost 16,000 new babies arriving each year. (That’s almost 44 per day—every day)
A recent patient survey indicated that 70 percent of the women who gave birth at Parkland in the first three months of 2006 were illegal immigrants. That’s 11,200 anchor babies born every year just in Dallas.
According to the article, the hospital spent $70.7 million delivering 15,938 babies in 2004 but managed to end up with almost 8 million dollars in surplus funding. Medicaid kicked in $34.5 million, Dallas County taxpayers kicked in $31.3 million and the feds tossed in another $9.5 million.
The average patient in Parkland in maternity wards is 25 years old, married and giving birth to her second child. She is also an illegal immigrant. By law, pregant women cannot be denied medical care based on their immigration status or ability to pay.
That doesn’t mean they should receive better care than everyday, middle-class American citizens. But at Parkland Hopital , they do. " Parkland Memorial Hospital has nine prenatal clinics. NINE.
The Dallas Morning News article followed a Hispanic woman who was a patient at one of the clinics and pregnant with her thrd child—her previous two were also born at Parkland. Her first two deliveries were free and the Mexican native was grateful beause it would have cost $200 to have them in Mexico. This time, the hospital wants her to pay $10 per visit and $100 for the deivery but she was unsure if she could come up with the money. Not that it matters, the hospital won’t turn her away.
How long has this been going on? What are the long-term effects? Well, another subject of the article was born at Parkland in 1986 shortly after her mother entered the US illegally - now she is having her own child there as well. (That’s right; she’s technically a US citizen.)
These women receive free prenatal care including medication, nutrition, birthing classes and child care classes. They also get freebies such as car seats, bottles, diapers and formula.
Most of these things are available to American citizens as well but only for low-income applicants and even then, the red tape involved is almost insurmountable.
Because these women are illegal immigrants, they do not have to provide any sort of legitimate identification - no proof of income. An American citizen would have to provide a social security number which would reveal their annual income - an illegal immigrant need only claim to be poor and the hospital must take them.
Parkland Hospital offers indigent care to Dallas County residents who earn less than $40,000 per year. (They also have to prove that they did not refuse health coverage at their current job… the ‘free’ care is not so easy for Americans.)
There are about 140 patients who received roughly $4 million dollars for un-reimbursed medical care. As it turns out, they did not qualify for free treatment because they resided outside of Dallas County so the hospital is going to sue them. Illegals get it all free. But U.S. citizens who live outside of Dallas County have been sued.
As if that isn’t enough, the illegal immigrant patients are actually complaining about hospital staff not speaking Spanish. In this AP story, the author speaks with a woman who is upset that she had to translate comments from the hospital staff into Spanish for her husband. The doctor was trying to explain the situation to the family and the mother was forced to translate for her husband who only spoke Spanish. This was apparently a great injustice to her.
In an attempt to create a Spanish-speaking staff, Parkland Hospital is now providing incentives in the form of extra pay for applicants who speak Spanish. Additionally, medical students at the University of Texas for which Parkland Hospital is the training facility will now have a Spanish language requirement added to their already jammed-packed curriculum. No other school in the country boasts such a multicultural requirement.
Remember that this is about only ONE hospital in Dallas, Texas. There are many more hospitals across our country that must also deal with this.
Ditto. And when I moved to Nevada, all I had to do was turn in my Florida driver license, take the written test, and -BAM!- I had a Nevada driver license.
All my driver license proves is that I am licensed to drive in the state of Nevada, and that I (supposedly) live at the address shown.
Stink, that letter is up on snopes.com and the accompanying article sheds more light on things than that email did. BTW, your email appears to be a heavily edited version of the original.
While the basic facts are true, the reasons for them are more entangled than the email would have people believe.
So it’s not just the hospital deciding to do this. As a nation, we have decided that it is the right thing to do.
And check out these tidbits:
I just checked this thread before heading to bed, and saw that Snowboarder Bo found this on snopes. I should have looked there. :smack:
My apologies to the folks in this thread for posting the info, even if, as Snowboarder Bo says the basic facts are true. I should have waited until tomorrow to post, since I’m sure a bit more time doing some google-fu would have found the snopes link.
I’ll make it a point to find some correct statistics before cutting and pasting an e-mail. I should have known better. I’m glad it only took one poster to find its validity before we wasted time discussing it.
Cheers,
SFP
No, it’s not. They write down my birthdate, and that’s about it.
Put it this way. A birth certificate from Maine doesn’t prove that I am a current US Citizen. or this. Naturalized citizens don’t have US birth certificates.
A birth certificate from Maine absolutely proves citizenship. A naturalized citizen is provided with some means of proving citizenship. I don’t understand your point at all. Citizenship is not a difficult thing to prove. I would expect to carry the necessary card(s) in another country if I was a naturalized citizen.
you missed the part about “current” There is nothing in a current driver’s license record that a) contains citizenship information (at least in the states i’ve lived in) or b) provides substantive evidence of current citizenship. do you think you can get a passport by flashing your D/L? no. I wonder why.
look, just face the facts. before the concept of an enhanced driver’s license, a driver’s license was never intended, set-up, designed, or able to adjudicate one’s citizenship - because it doesn’t have to. there’s no proviso that a driver has to be a citizen to drive in a given state - there is a proviso, however, that the person has to be a legal resident (and i don’t mean permanent resident) to be issued one, and identity has to be verified. pretending like possessing a driver’s license is a good proxy for citizenship is erroneous, and it is precisely the reason why it isn’t accepted at the Canadian border anymore.
Not 100%. For example, this woman was born in Nevada, and hence would have a Nevada birth certificate. However, she is not a U.S. citizen. (She renounced her U.S. citizenship when she was naturalised as an Australian, presumably because she had political ambitions.)