http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_arizona_immigration
Three cheers to the judge. The part requiring legal immigrants to carry papers is the most disgusting of all. Glad that the courts are doing their job here. Let’s hope the legal smackdowns continue down the appeals process.
Uh…hate to break it to you, but that’s still federal law.
The federal law does not make it a crime not to carry a green card, and the federal government, unlike Arizona, actually has jurisdiction.
So much for your “words have meaning” position.
Tell me, what does the phrase “must be in your possession at all times” mean in your language?
I am curious about why this is “disgusting” and which sovereign nations do not have this requirement. Have liberals swung so far that their position is now that there should be no such thing as citizenship?
When you go to work, do your house or apartment and its contents cease to be in your possession? Do you have anything in a safe-deposit box? If so, is it in your possession? “Must be carried upon one’s person” would be the language needed to carry the meaning you attribute to “in your possession”. Otherwise legal residents would be unable to take baths or showers, to go swimming, would have to make love while holding their green cards in their hands or mouths…
Just like you can’t legally go for a drive when your Driver’s License is in your safety deposit box. But if it’s in your glovebox, it’s fine.
“In your possession” != “on your person,” but it is still more rigorous than “know where it is.”
Is it really that complicated?
I still say the quickest and most effective way to get rid of these laws would be to actually enforce them as written. It wouldn’t take too many legislators getting arrested for not having their papers for them to realize how stupid an idea it is.
The key, of course, is that this law requires everyone to carry proof of citizenship. But officer, you might say, I don’t need to carry my papers, I’m a citizen! To which the reply is, prove it.
No actually the problem with the law is that it did not require everyone to carry proof of citizen ship, there is that pesky “suspicion of being illegal” clause that’s where the racial bias comes in.
The Arizona Law dealling with illegals was copied almost word for word from the federal law. The Feds refuse to enforce the law. One of their excuses was that they did not have the manpower. Arizona said …‘good…then we will help you’. The feds wanted no part of such help. The federal government under obama simply refuses to help American citizens in Arizona defend their state and themselves from an onslaught from another nation. An onslaught that is costing them tons of money and the very lives of their citizens due to a great influx of illegal criminals.
Dems think they have won a great victory. They are celebrating the defeat of the law by an activist judge. They do not know that this is another nail in their proverbial political coffins. A lot of people are angry over this judge’s ruling. We all have seen the socialism and anti-Americanism of the obama regime. When Washing D.C. will allly’s itself with illegal alien invaders over American citizens; when Washington sides with law breakers and ignores the suffering and needs of it’s own citizens; then the citizens of this nation will must change Washington in Novermber or ignore it.
This aciton by a liberal judge has added more votes against the democrats in Novermber. People will not forget the plight of Arizona. Washington is hastening the time when people are simply going to quit obeying the dictates of left leaning activist judges. Soon…people and state governments will simply ignore the dictates of Washington D.C. IN most instances…the rules and laws coming out of Washington D.C. are unconstitutional anyway. Let them send their troops. Frankly…when the American people finally get enough…this nation does not have enough troops to enforce their ridiculousness.
Washington D.C. is run by internationalists. Obama is an internationalists. What does he care of the problems or the borders the nation?
Yes…he and the dems think the won a great victory today. THey have simply added more fuel to the fire that will eventually virtually burn down their rule.
The actual law is U.S. CODE > TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER II > Part VII > § 1304. Forms for registration and fingerprinting
Having quoted that, I’m an alien who does not carry his green card at all times: I only carry it when I’m proposing to leave or enter the United States. However, I don’t look or sound like a Mexican 
It’s quite similar, except for the blatantly unconstitutional and unenforceable parts that the judge rightly put a stop too. But I guess freedom, to you, means only your freedoms, huh?
And, boy, hyperbole much? Do you really expect some kind of well thought out response to what is really nothing but a rant?
Of course; Arizona is full of bigoted scum or this law wouldn’t exist. Of course they are angry with anything that derails their racist crusade. And given what they are, that’s a good thing.
Only in your fantasies. Obama is a moderate right winger, a standard corporatist Democrat not a “socialist”. Nor is he “anti-American”; certainly less so than the Republicans whom have made it clear they are the enemies of America (along with everywhere else). The Republicans are loyal to themselves alone, and will cheerfully drag the country down to ruin if it profits them, or simply in revenge for not getting their way.
I do not know her politics but she was recommended to Bill Clinton for her current position by Arizona Senator and current Senate Minority Whip (read republican) John Kyl. She passed the senate confirmation unanimously in late 2000 which, as it happens, was a Republican controlled Senate.
As for this being a “liberal” thing it is my recollection that the courts, wherever they are, have pretty much unanimously sided with the federal government when it comes to matters of immigration. Immigration is clearly in the purview of the federal government and in this case the feds feel Arizona was encroaching on their territory.
I’d be willing to bet if it was Bush with a fully republican congress you would have seen this happen.
But hey, don’t bother letting facts get in the way of your rant.
I do carry my green card around all the time by virtue of stashing it my wallet, but I was wondering if there had been any cases that had tested “shall at all times carry with him”. Technically I would fall foul of this law if I left my wallet with my wife while I went swimming at a beach. If an overzealous officer caught me out and charged me, what do you think an actual court would say?
Simple question from a Canadian. I happen to know that our local police can arrest drunk drivers and charge them for driving beyond .08 which I know contravenes a federal statute.
Are you telling me that local law enforcement in the States are prohibited from enforcing federal law ?
If you get pulled over (or stopped for committing some crime/infraction) the police can ask you for identification. If you cannot produce the documentation requested then that is a problem for you. If it then turns out you are in the country illegally the police will turn you over to immigration to be dealt with.
The difference here is Arizona troopers could stop you merely to ask for documentation. If you merely “look” like an immigrant the police could harass you demanding your documents.
The guy above was ranting about the socialism of the Obama regime. Seems to me police demanding papers of whoever they feel like walking down the road is what smacks more of the old Soviet socialist regime.
Wrong. Go read the Arizona law.
Do tell what “reasonable suspicion” is?
Apparently I am not the only one raising these questions:
In my recently-announced position as spokesman for all liberals, I must say: I’d be fine with that, actually.