The issue of “racial discrimination” in sight of a national problem is nothing new to American politics. We all remember (and still deal with today) the issue of airport security, and the question of who is more likely to be a terrorist: the seventy year old woman, or the twenty-five year old Middle-Eastern man. The same question is now, in a way, being asked by the Arizona legislature in the context of illegal immigration from Mexico.
The law allows police officers in the state of Arizona to ask for papers proving one’s citizenship. Entertainers like Shakera are asserting that the law goes “against all human dignity.” Others, like Ricky Martin, have gone as far as to say that the law “…makes no sense.” This policy is also fueling anger among the American people, leading to protests and boycotts of Arizona products (even of Arizona Iced Tea, which is produced by a New York-based company). President Barack Obama has also promised to act as a watchdog over this “misguided” law.
On the surface, the law appears to be a grave violation of civil rights. However, when one digs through all the propaganda, the truth is allowed to shine through the doublespeak. Most of the claims against this bill have been made on the basis that police officers can request the papers of people they think may be illegal immigrants. This has been blown out of proportion, and now the general consensus is that cops will be driving around Arizona streets in huge vans stopping to request papers from any Spanish speaking person and throwing them in van to be shipped back to Mexico. This is not the case. That would be blatant racism.
The new law allows for police officers to request the papers of an individual if, and only if, the officer reasonably suspects that the individual is in the United States unlawfully. An officer cannot make claims, and the Attorney General will not investigate claims based “solely on race, color or national origin.” The contact that an officer must have with the suspect is also limited to a “lawful stop, detention, or arrest.” This means that a police officer must have proof of a variable other than race that would suggest the person is an illegal immigrant, as well as contact during a lawful stop, detention, or arrest. If the person in question cannot produce said papers, they can be charged with a misdemeanor, become subject to a background check, and possibly deported.
This law is simply acting as a means to solve the illegal immigration problem so prevalent in this country. It is Arizona that is taking initiative to lead the way. The 10th Amendment leaves this issue up to the states, and Arizona should be commended, not condemned. Illegal immigration from Mexico is obviously not having the profound effect in Maine that it is in Arizona. This law is simply an instance of a state taking care of its own problem. Federal immigration reform is not necessary if border states and others affected by illegal immigration step up to the plate and solve the problem themselves.
Immigration has been, and always will be, a part of the American culture. Economically it makes sense, as the United States receives someone with potential for new and exciting ideas, who was educated on the dime of another nation. I have five foreign nationals in my extended family, from South Korea, Russia, England, and two from Japan. All of them took the time to go through the bureaucracy and come to the United States legally. By no means should immigration be limited in the United States; foreigners who wish to become citizens should simply come in through the front door.
