In reading a bit more about the requirement to identify oneself that the supreme court upheld, it is still very limited.

It only allows individual states to enact their own laws.

Detention for failing to identify must be trivial, less than 60 minutes at most

There can be no requirement to "prove" identity by producing an ID card or driver's license and no information other than a person's name can be required.

By my reading it is a relatively weak ruling since even the majority opinion suggests that if the police actually did anything with the information then there would be 5th Amendment problems. I think it would be very easy in a typical case for at least 1 of the five in the majority to split.

I think if I were a district attorney reviewing police procedures and training I would not want the cops to demand identification in any kind of coercive situation since that would likely endanger any conviction.

Mostly it just means that in the context of investigating another crime or incident(like a car accident), a cop has the authority to request indentification and you have to provide it. We can all see the benefits of this.

The new arizona law just takes it a step further and if the cop has a suspicion, after asking you to indentify yourself *during* the investigation of some kind of incident, that you are here illegally, that you can be held until your status is proven.

Assuming this is what happens, I think any lawyer would be hard pressed to claim the law is unconstitutional or that people have the right to refuse to provide proof of indenity to a police officer during an investigation.

Alarmists believe that a cop will drive through a suburban neighborhood, see a hispanic guy trimming a tree, and stop and arrest him until his status can be proven. In that incident the law would not apply and the cop would be legally in the wrong.

There is nothing wrong with the law as written, but it assumes a reliable force of unbiased police officers.

The interesting thing is that previous to this law, if you were arrested for a crime, and then suspected of being in the country illegally, the police could hold you until ICE came and investigated regardless of whether you were actually charged with the crime you were orignally arrested for.

IE: A hispanic dude in the country illegally gets arrested for trespassing. He is in a holding cell at the station, and when trying to determine his identity the police become suspicous he is an illegal immigrant. They call ICE about it. After calling ICE, the police receive information that the alleged tresspasser was actually invited to the place he "tresspassed" onto and no crime was committed. They can still hold him via the immigration hold until ICE takes him or confirms he is legally in the US.

That scenario happens all the time with the caveat that ICE generally ignores such calls and the police eventually release the dude since they can only hold him for a certain amount of time.

So really, its just misinformation and misguided outrage fueling the protests.

Savarel: I pretty much agree with your assessment of what the police can do now and under the new law. But that is outrageous! We can't have a law that potentially violates the civil rights of people based on police goodwill when we have cops like some in Maricopa County that already have investigations into civil rights and human rights violations by many state and local authorities including the FBI and the DOJ. It should be noted that MCSD does not deny the facts. The question is the legality. They go into hispanic neighborhoods and stop people for license plate lighting (even if they have what Ford provided with the vehicle, it may not be good enough in the cop's judgement) or for having worn tire tread. These things are happening NOW, Joe brags about it. Nearly all of the stops are on hispanics. Record show that 85% of all arrests are cleared without prosecution and it is much higher when race is considered.

In a world where all cops were honorable there might not be a problem. Many, probably most cops in Arizona are honorable. But a few that are in power in certain areas are blatantly targeting people for race. That is wrong.

You're right.

I cannot argue with any of what you just said. Obviously there is a problem. I just think a better idea would be to weed out the corruption(ie: get rid of Sheriff Joe) in our law enforcement.

The law may not be a great idea, but its not a terrible idea either. Its just that it gives a certain sheriff another way of abusing his power.

He is the real problem and hopefully maricopa county will wake up one day and get rid of him.

Well, the trouble is that Joe's cronies have taken over the legislature as well.

I think the only real hope is international and national outrage putting economic pressure on Arizona. We are beginning to see that now and I hope it snowballs. The state can't afford it of course but hopefully some tough times will be a catalyst for the voters to see how stupid they have been to elect these guys in the first place.

DoingHomework, I saw you refer to this practice earlier in the thread, and I meant to ask you about it. Do you have any evidence that this is actually happening, or were you just exaggerating a little for rhetorical effect? All vehicles must pass specific "roadworthiness" certification standards, so I'm not sure how a brand-new Ford rolling off the assembly line can be considered in conformance with legal standards, but just seconds later can be considered "unroadworthy" by a police officer when nothing has changed.

Again, I'm not trying to call you out, I'm just asking for a reference. If this is indeed happening, then I'd have to agree that such a practice is outrageous.

Phoenix Copwatch has documented it numerous time. Joe Arpaio himself has joked about it in an interview.



Exactly! But that is what is happening here in Arizona. These nutcases are on a crusade for states' rights. They consider the Federal standards and laws to not apply unless there is an interstate commerce issue. While the standards that applied when the vehicle was manufactured met Federal standards, Joe claims that an Arizona peace officer still has the right to question whether the particular vehicle at the particular time is in compliance with Arizona law. Of course the driver can question the stop and challenge any evidence gathered or conviction obtained under the Federal Exclusionary Rule ("fruits of the poinsonous tree") but they are either afraid to do so, can't because they've been locked up or deported, or the charges are dropped before trial so that they lack "standing." As I said, 85% of MCSD cases are cleared without trial. That basically means that 85% of the charges are dropped, usually for lack of evidence. But they lock people up for days, weeks, or months in Joe's tent city to punish them before trial. To me it is clear that he has just figured out a way to abuse and harrass people.

But you don't need to believe me. Amnesty International has singled him out for abuse of human rights. The US Department of Justice is investigating as is the Federal Bureau of Investigation for different reasons. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors tried to audit him and investigate abuses. He promptly arrested 2 of them and accused them of corruption for questioning him. Of course the charges will be dropped as usual before trial I'm sure.

This legislature also legalized automatic weapons in defiance of the federal ban. As long as they are manufactured in the state and never leave the state they are now legal.



Search on Amnesty International's web site

Try here: http://www.phoenixcopwatch.org/

Search the archives of the various Phoenix newspapers

Search Cnn - they had a recent story about it

Listen to Savarel. He disagrees with me about the new law but he lives here in Arizona and he knows this stuff is going on!

The Department of Homeland Security speciifcally stripped all MCSD officers of their authority to enforce federal immigration laws last year because of what was going on.

Of course it's not hard to find support for any opinion online. But I think if you do your own research on objective, reputable sources you will find that what is alread happening in AZ is far beyond what is done elsewhere. Of course there are people that support and defend it and they are entitled to their opinion. But there were people that opposed civil rights 50 years ago too and they had good reasons.

Do your own research, cut through the politics and the rhetoric, and decide i you think what is going on is right. I think we agree there is a problem. But this is not the solution.

Alright, well... first things first: Arizona passed that education reform that bans ethnic based classes. If that isn't paranoia and or racism, I don't know what else to call it. Talk about bigotry.

Second, I'm all for deportation of every single illegal immigrant we can find, however, I recognize the unlikely nature of that happening. So, the other plan, is FAR easier and affects FAR fewer people and will also fix a large amount of our budgets: IF you HIRE illegal immigrants or pay them for any reason, your pushed out of business, assets liquidated, tossed in jail, and your companies funds are used to fuel and close budget deficits. Maybe THAT will stop people from hiring them. If not, crank it up a notch, if caught harboring and employing illegal immigrants, you are deported yourself with all your employees and your citizenship revoked...

targeting the immigrants themselves will achieve nothing. More will always come.