An Immigration Lawyer & Negotiator Comments on SB 1070 - The Enemy Within

    DALLAS, TX, July 12, 2010 /24-7PressRelease/ -- It took some time, but I have to state I am glad the federal government finally filed a suit challenging Arizona SB 1070. In reading through the federal complaint it becomes clear that Arizona is not equipped to handle immigration. Moreover, the way SB 1070 is worded, it will create a lot of confusion and issues of interpretation. The severity of the wording will force many people to spend time in jail while their immigration status is being resolved. Racism will develop where it wasn't before, and worse yet, America will hurt.

This great country of ours, as young as it is, has had many great burdens to bear. The recent years have been especially tough on the country and its citizens, who are disliked in many parts of the world before they open their mouths, simply for being American. Well, in my humble opinion, this country of ours, that is making such an effort to be a melting pot of the world has just been dealt the biggest blow imaginable, and it was Arizona, "the enemy within", so to speak. People who don't understand English across the globe only get the gist of what went on in Arizona. As someone well traveled, let me assure you that the misunderstandings that have rippled globally have done irreparable damage to the integrity of what America stands for and once again, we are feared and disliked, rather than loved and respected, which we should be. As a country, we are embarking on one of the toughest global challenges we could take on- integration of global populations. We have no one's shoulders to stand on, we are learning as we go along and doing our best. This should be respected because even as an immigration lawyer who is in private practice and not working for the federal government, I understand how large and multi-faceted the challenge is. Short of war, I cannot imagine something more layered and complex to resolve than immigration policy.

The federal government does not have the resources to handle all the additional request and workload Arizona will impose on it. As an international and immigration lawyer for the past 22 years I have always wondered why certain systems are duplicative and wasteful of government resources. For example, the fact that a person has to get a case approved in the U.S. and later again at an embassy or consulate. Same job repeated. However, when I think of the hardship imposed on the federal government ascertaining that various people who are 'suspected' of being illegal by the Arizona authorities, the waste of federal resources is hard to fathom. The main reason is that many people who will be caught under this massive net will be found to be legal; people the federal authorities have already logged into the system and accounted for. The flip side of this section of the law is that many people who are here legally will end up spending time in jail while Arizona waits for verification, which couldn't possibly be instantaneous. They will lose jobs. Children will go without food and care while the other parent works, while one is in custody. Children will lose time away from school. And these will be children of US citizens, unless of course, Arizona really is sincere in thinking they will make no mistakes in the enforcement of SB 1070.

Let's consider that for a moment. We have someone visiting from Italy who chooses to go to Arizona. The person does not keep a passport in their pocket because he or she wants to go to nightclubs and cannot afford to lose it. He or she is in a car accident and is arrested for some reason. No proof as to citizenship. That person speaks with an accent. The person is residing with a friend and not at a hotel. I somehow don't think the police officer is going to drive the person home to pick up the passport. However, with an accent, and no identification, I would think under the person would fall under the provision in SB 1070 that states: "REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c)". Jail it is. (Continue reading and you will understand). He or she will have a great story to tell their friends and relatives about Arizona when they get home. However, being a high-level negotiator and understanding human nature, it's not only Arizona they will remember....it's America, and tourism will fall, on its way down with our global reputation.

This aspect of the Senate Bill 1070 brings to light a very important aspect: chilling effect: it will affect tourism not only to Arizona but to the United States. In all honesty, I don't know why such a broad and strict law was enacted. I am absolutely not in favor of illegal immigration. However, before I closed the door to a state of the United States, I would simply pack up and move somewhere else, we have many more to choose from. Arizona is going to lose a lot of money, as will their citizens and residents. The housing markets will suffer and with that decline many future retirees will lose the money they so desperately will require when they are no longer working. Foreigners will not put Arizona at the top of their list when vacationing. To some people who are new to understanding America, all that will resonate when they think of moving to the US will be Arizona. Of this I am certain as I have conducted seminars to the lawyers of Rome at the State Bar and this was asked of me. The person thought all of America was like this: an unwelcoming police state. I wish I knew how many decades it will take for this to be forgotten.

Another section of SB 1070 I find curious states "A PERSON MAY BRING AN ACTION IN SUPERIOR COURT TO CHALLENGE ANY OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE THAT ADOPTS OR IMPLEMENTS A POLICY THAT LIMITS OR RESTRICTS THE ENFORCEMENT OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAWS TO LESS THAN THE FULL EXTENT PERMITTED BY FEDERAL LAW." Arizona is going to have to hire a lot more judges and build courtrooms to accommodate every lawsuit that arises out of this provision. Moreover, one of the finest qualities a police officer can bring to the table is his or her discretion about a matter. This is taken away. More importantly, interpretation. What does implement mean? How does someone limit or restrict enforcement of federal laws? SB 1070 is not clear. I cannot see any interpretative sections that clearly define what everything means and what the boundaries are. Everyone not wearing a seat belt will 'have' to be stopped under this law, or face a lawsuit. At the end of the day, Arizona should be one of the safest locales on the planet because all crimes should be noted and enforcement will ensue. That part will be nice. However, they will need to hire a lot of people to enforce the laws, and courtroom personnel to deal with all the lawsuits as well as judges.

Racial profiling is a very controversial area and one that SB 1070 is presented with defending. It prohibits racial profiling. However, let's look at who makes the decisions here....a person not a computer. Humans will make mistakes. Read the cases and you will see how many US citizens have already been deported nationwide because people make mistakes. However, what criteria can we use to determine whether someone could possibly be a foreigner? Race, color, and national origin cannot be considered. So what is left? How is a person charged with enforcing SB 1070 supposed to enforce to the fullest extent SB 1070. What does an illegal person look like? If it's not race, then let's say the person has your WASP look...what's left? Is everyone with an accent a suspect or only some people? If someone does not want to profile, does that mean anyone who is Hispanic is off the hook? Realistically, what is left? How do you determine someone can be illegal? Was the law not drafted with the point of dealing with all of the illegal persons from Mexico? Or is it the Canadians they wanted to move out? But then they can look and sound like Americans (with the exception of using the term 'eh')....what would characterize an illegal? Their clothes? Do we profile on the basis of poverty or style? The answers do not seem simple. Are the people burdened with enforcing this law subject to unreasonable demands placed on them? Are they adequately trained to deal with all of this?

Carrying your documentation is another controversial area. The people who like SB 1070 claim that under federal law aliens have to carry documentation and they are only enforcing federal law. There are many laws we each have to follow. However, sometimes laws aren't enforced and at other times they aren't practical. The feds have decided not to strictly enforce that provision and I think it's because they feel enforcing it makes no sense. For example, I went to board a plane last week and the previous passenger had forgotten their passport. In a society such as Arizona will create, that passport will be sold and used for ID; a street value of about $5,000. A lot of IDs will be lost or stolen; citizens will be mugged just for their IDs and an underground market will be created for people who want to purchase IDs of all kinds. Make no mistake, 22 years as an immigration lawyer has demonstrated to me that illegals are not just the people everyone generalizes them to be; there are many very wealthy people who have blended into this society and they are very much illegal; I know because they call me. They have either committed crimes that cannot be waived (claiming to be a US citizen) or entered with their families a long time ago and just stayed with no way to repair the problem. If there is an 'amnesty' of sorts they will not apply as they have too much to lose. When I went to Harvard 10 years ago I heard that Boston alone had 250,000 illegals of Irish descent who blend into the city just fine.

The law states a "lawful stop, detention, or arrest . . . in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance of a county, city or town or this state." Is required before an officer can ask someone about their status. Now, as this state wants to see full enforcement of SB 1070 it would be unlawful I would think if a lawful stop were not initiated for any offence. Does this mean Arizona is prepared to triple its police force so they can stop everyone who does anything illegal..on the roads and elsewhere? My reading is of SB 1070 is that it expects strict enforcement so not stopping someone who crossed a double line (which leads to 6 months of probation in Dallas plus a $300+ fine) would be an offence in itself as it prevents enforcement of SB 1070 ... in fact, could a citizen not file a lawsuit against an 'official' who did not make a lawful stop when one was required? Would citizens not take the law into their own hands if a police officer does not make a stop and hold a person ( a possible US citizen ) until another police officer arrives? This may sound severe but judging by the mentality of Arizona at this time, I foresee the day when citizens will be defending this right in court...in Arizona of course....in their soon-to-be-clogged courtrooms.

Reasonable suspicion is an interesting term. A Canadian 'snowbird' enters the US to spend time in Arizona in winter. He or she does not carry their passport. The person is caught speeding. As we are not profiling we ask the person about their immigration background. Sounds like an American, looks like anyone else from Arizona, yet may have been here 10 years or 10 days....how does 'that' person create reasonable suspicion? Or would he or she ever be asked? Yes, many issues here. What if the Canadian is from the Ukraine, newly moved to Canada and speaks very little english....is that person more likely to create that suspicion? Does that become one of the criteria? The defenders of SB 1070 state that 800+ documents define the term. Have they created good training documents so that police officers and others understand this concept? I haven't heard of any training material that comprehensive despite reading many articles and documents relating to SB 1070. Speaking english well seems to be one of the criteria that will be used...

Sure, there are easy examples of seats being removed from a car, driving through a smuggling corridor...and most people would support that situation...but SB 1070 does not come across as being satisfied with that. And again, humans will be enforcing this law, not machines. Remember what happened last month to a US citizen by the name of Luis Alberto Delgado, reported the Houston Chronicle. The 19-year-old was carrying his birth certificate, a state of Texas ID card, 'and' a social security card when stopped for not wearing a seat belt. He was deported. A US citizen for whom the Texas Department of State Health Services confirmed they had a matching birth certificate, which the Chronicle examined. The reason was that he spoke very little English. That may be one of the ways of profiling; Canadians will be lucky, persons from Mexico not as lucky. He tried to re-enter 'his' country, but was informed he would spend 20 years in prison as he was previously deported. This also happened to a gentleman from Los Angeles who was mentally disabled. Does Arizona think they are so perfect a population that this will never happen to them...in view of the fact that SB 1070 mandates strict enforcement?

Humans. At the end of the day, sure, someone may be here illegally willing to work for meager wages and living in a hot trailer at the end of a long, hard day doing a job an American won't, but are these people not also human? As SB 1070 stands, if an illegal is hit by a car or mugged and bleeding on the ground and a citizen drives that person to a hospital because it is quicker than waiting for an ambulance, that person will have violated SB 1070. In fact, SB 1070 was amended to even allow a first responder to bring that person to help....before he or she would have to die on the streets of Arizona.

I could go on for days analyzing SB 1070 but at some point enough is stated to make a point or two. I have nothing against Arizona, but I simply wish they would have thought through the global and political implications of SB 1070 before enacting it. Also, I am not sure how much they consulted with their neighboring states because they are shifting the burden from their backyard to the other states. Did they forget they are a border state? That goes along with the territory.....And this is just an opinion of someone who is 'not' in favor of, nor supports illegal immigration.

Steven Riznyk
http://www.myImmigrationAttorney.com
[email protected]

Author of www.Immigration-Revealed.com

# # #