One of the men who helped write Arizona’s new immigration law said he’s confident it will withstand legal challenges, because the law specifically addresses issues such as racial profiling, which are likely to be the basis of state or federal lawsuits.
“I’m confident Arizona will prevail,” Kris Kobach said Wednesday in a conference call with reporters. Kobach is a constitutional law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and served as chief adviser to former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft on immigration law and border security.
Kobach said criticism that the Arizona law will impose new requirements on non-citizens to carry documents proving their status is unfounded, given that every non-citizen in the United States has been required to carry such documents since Congress passed the Alien Registration Act in 1940.
“It has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep certain registration documents on their person,” Kobach said, adding that the Arizona law simply makes it illegal in Arizona to violate that federal law.
All the new bill does is make Arizona law mirror federal immigration law, Kobach said.
He said that any claims of an “equal protection violation” –- or racial profiling -– is also addressed in Arizona HB2162, which was signed into law last month by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer.
“Given that the law expressly prohibits racial profiling, it will be very difficult for them to prevail,” Kobach said.
He said the law was written with the expectation that it would be challenged by the same groups that have tried and failed to overturn other immigration laws in Arizona, including statutes that prevent people without proof of legal status from getting state benefits and those that require employers to use the federal E-Verify system to make sure only people with legal status are hired in the state.
Section II of the new law, Kobach said, states that a law enforcement officer “may not consider race, color or national origin” in making any stops or determining any aliens’ immigration status.
Most criminal statutes don’t include a specific provision barring racial profiling, instead relying on the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment for that protection. “So really, you have two layers of protection” against racial profiling, Kobach said.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary committee, scheduled the conference call to “dispel the myths” about the Arizona law.
"Over the past few weeks, we have all seen the uproar surrounding the recently passed Arizona immigration enforcement law,” Smith said. “The public outcry has been largely due to misinformation about the bill, which closely mirrors federal law.
“It is no surprise that Arizona felt the need to take action considering how its citizens have been affected by the serious violence along its border and the lack of border security,” Smith said. “Often, legal immigrant communities are hit the hardest by border-related crime, and also feel the strongest negative effects when it comes to competition for jobs.
“Instead of securing the border, the Obama administration is doing ‘amnesty on the cheap’ by not funding additional security and not enforcing the laws,” Smith said. “If the Obama administration continues to fail to secure the border, it should not be surprised if other states take similar action.”
Smith said perhaps one of the biggest myths out there is that the debate over the Arizona law is about immigration.
“Many open borders groups intentionally blur the line between legal and illegal,” Smith said. “But there is a difference between those who come the right way and those who enter the wrong way."
“I’m confident Arizona will prevail,” Kris Kobach said Wednesday in a conference call with reporters. Kobach is a constitutional law professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and served as chief adviser to former U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft on immigration law and border security.
Kobach said criticism that the Arizona law will impose new requirements on non-citizens to carry documents proving their status is unfounded, given that every non-citizen in the United States has been required to carry such documents since Congress passed the Alien Registration Act in 1940.
“It has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep certain registration documents on their person,” Kobach said, adding that the Arizona law simply makes it illegal in Arizona to violate that federal law.
All the new bill does is make Arizona law mirror federal immigration law, Kobach said.
He said that any claims of an “equal protection violation” –- or racial profiling -– is also addressed in Arizona HB2162, which was signed into law last month by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer.
“Given that the law expressly prohibits racial profiling, it will be very difficult for them to prevail,” Kobach said.
He said the law was written with the expectation that it would be challenged by the same groups that have tried and failed to overturn other immigration laws in Arizona, including statutes that prevent people without proof of legal status from getting state benefits and those that require employers to use the federal E-Verify system to make sure only people with legal status are hired in the state.
Section II of the new law, Kobach said, states that a law enforcement officer “may not consider race, color or national origin” in making any stops or determining any aliens’ immigration status.
Most criminal statutes don’t include a specific provision barring racial profiling, instead relying on the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment for that protection. “So really, you have two layers of protection” against racial profiling, Kobach said.
Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), ranking member of the House Judiciary committee, scheduled the conference call to “dispel the myths” about the Arizona law.
"Over the past few weeks, we have all seen the uproar surrounding the recently passed Arizona immigration enforcement law,” Smith said. “The public outcry has been largely due to misinformation about the bill, which closely mirrors federal law.
“It is no surprise that Arizona felt the need to take action considering how its citizens have been affected by the serious violence along its border and the lack of border security,” Smith said. “Often, legal immigrant communities are hit the hardest by border-related crime, and also feel the strongest negative effects when it comes to competition for jobs.
“Instead of securing the border, the Obama administration is doing ‘amnesty on the cheap’ by not funding additional security and not enforcing the laws,” Smith said. “If the Obama administration continues to fail to secure the border, it should not be surprised if other states take similar action.”
Smith said perhaps one of the biggest myths out there is that the debate over the Arizona law is about immigration.
“Many open borders groups intentionally blur the line between legal and illegal,” Smith said. “But there is a difference between those who come the right way and those who enter the wrong way."
No comments:
Post a Comment