Ariz. Immigration Lawsuit Targets Cop Training
A seventh challenge to Arizona's tough new immigration crackdown says training materials designed to teach police officers how to enforce the law give "vague and ill-defined factors" as reasons to question someone's legal status.
Officers aren't supposed to use a person's race to determine whether there's reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.
But the lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court, says the training materials developed by state police bosses allow officers to rely on things like whether a person speaks poor English, looks nervous or is traveling in an overcrowded vehicle.
They can even take into account whether someone is wearing several layers of clothing in a hot climate, or hanging out in an area where illegal immigrants are known to look for work.
That will lead to "widespread" racial profiling of Hispanics, the lawsuit says.
The law, set to take effect July 29, already faces legal challenges from two police officers, other groups and the U.S. Justice Department, which says the law usurps the federal government's "pre-eminent authority" under the Constitution to regulate immigration.
The latest lawsuit's filers, including the League of United Latin American Citizens, expect it to be heard by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, who is hearing the six other legal challenges. Bolton said this week that she is making no promises to rule on the lawsuits before the law takes effect.
The latest challenge also argues that immigrants who already are known to federal authorities and who have petitions to legalize their status will be subject to arrest because they don't have the specific documents the new law requires.
The enforcement guidelines being challenged were adopted by the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board and will be distributed to all 15,000 Arizona police officers.
Police departments will decide the best way to teach their forces. There is no requirement that all 15,000 Arizona police officers complete the training before the law takes effect.
The law requires police enforcing another law to ask people about their immigration status if there's a "reasonable suspicion" they're in the country illegally.
More Immigration Coverage
Colbert Teams Up with UFW Over Immigration
Arizona Cancels Conference With Mexican Govs.
Audit Reveals Shoddy Immigration Records for Gov Employees
Dem. Rep.: Lawsuit over Ariz. Law a "Sideshow"
Ariz. Gov: We Will Beat Immigration Lawsuits
Feds Sue to Block Ariz. Immigration Law
© 2010 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Officers aren't supposed to use a person's race to determine whether there's reasonable suspicion they're in the country illegally.
But the lawsuit, filed Friday in federal court, says the training materials developed by state police bosses allow officers to rely on things like whether a person speaks poor English, looks nervous or is traveling in an overcrowded vehicle.
They can even take into account whether someone is wearing several layers of clothing in a hot climate, or hanging out in an area where illegal immigrants are known to look for work.
That will lead to "widespread" racial profiling of Hispanics, the lawsuit says.
The law, set to take effect July 29, already faces legal challenges from two police officers, other groups and the U.S. Justice Department, which says the law usurps the federal government's "pre-eminent authority" under the Constitution to regulate immigration.
The latest lawsuit's filers, including the League of United Latin American Citizens, expect it to be heard by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton, who is hearing the six other legal challenges. Bolton said this week that she is making no promises to rule on the lawsuits before the law takes effect.
The latest challenge also argues that immigrants who already are known to federal authorities and who have petitions to legalize their status will be subject to arrest because they don't have the specific documents the new law requires.
The enforcement guidelines being challenged were adopted by the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board and will be distributed to all 15,000 Arizona police officers.
Police departments will decide the best way to teach their forces. There is no requirement that all 15,000 Arizona police officers complete the training before the law takes effect.
The law requires police enforcing another law to ask people about their immigration status if there's a "reasonable suspicion" they're in the country illegally.
More Immigration Coverage
Colbert Teams Up with UFW Over Immigration
Arizona Cancels Conference With Mexican Govs.
Audit Reveals Shoddy Immigration Records for Gov Employees
Dem. Rep.: Lawsuit over Ariz. Law a "Sideshow"
Ariz. Gov: We Will Beat Immigration Lawsuits
Feds Sue to Block Ariz. Immigration Law
Popular in Politics
- IRS' Lerner: "I have not done anything wrong" 666 Comments
- Obama to view Oklahoma tornado damage Sunday
- Christie: Keep politics out of Oklahoma disaster relief
- Former Miss America might challenge McConnell
- Anthony Weiner comeback try begins: Running for NYC mayor 120 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Major immigration overhaul passes first big test 68 Comments
- WH says criticism of its handling of IRS story is "legitimate"
To me something done this deliberately (or rather, not done) feels like betrayal. I feel sadness that my beautiful and powerful America may be in danger. The country my children were to inherit might not be there for them. Why? Why would he do this? I don?t know. Maybe he wants to upset the balance between the two parties by tossing 13 million foreign nationals into the mix. Or maybe he is so na?ve he thinks he is doing the right thing (but for whom? For America? For the World as a whole?) Most presidents like to think that future generations will look back with admiration at their time in office as enlightened. Things got better under them. Maybe he has ideas of what the world should look like in 10 or 20 or 50 years. If so, I wish he would tell us what he is trying to accomplish so the American people can either agree or disagree, because I am getting a little anxious.
Of COURSE, inability to speak English, traveling in a crowded vehicle, or hanging out in a "day labor" pick up zone, are high probability indicators, of illegals.
Being in an area in TX, where illegal traffic is quite high, I can assure you, that if the Government really WANTED to pick up and deport illegals, that would be a relatively simple task. All of the residents here, know where they are, where they go, and what they do. It doesn't take any special ability whatsoever, for a local to identify thousands of illegals, in this area alone.
The government simply REFUSES to do their job......at all!
>>> by formrusmcsgt July 11, 2010 9:44 AM EDT, "Well, first off I'll offer the fact that I've fought for my country in combat? Have you? I seriously doubt it. "
Three tours in Vietnam. Eleven years in the military. Five years in the DoD. But what does this have to do with the issue?
---
with that service, would you accept accusations of inaction?
I don't think so.
Nor do I.
Good morning, all.
As always, a pleasure.
You lose. AZ wins. Deal with it.
--
The law is facing 7 different legal challenges.
Don't hold your breath....
You enforced my point. Your thinking - disguised as whining, complaining, and pointing fingers has amounted to nothing. Take your thinking to your legislators. Go help AZ stop the flow. You whine and fail to act. Clearly that has been and continues to be your modus operandi.
---
Well, first off I'll offer the fact that I've fought for my country in combat?
Have you?
I seriously doubt it.
So don't try to preach to me about action.
Secondly, the bitter partisanship that exists is our defeating factor.
Even if I'm correct, and my formula would work, getting both side to buy it would be a possibility because it would require cooperation to implement.
And there's no appetite for cooperation. Both sides take a "it has to be OUR way or forget it" attitude, which GUARANTEES that no progress will transpire.
So it will be a status quo ad infinitim issue until that changes.
Three tours in Vietnam. Eleven years in the military. Five years in the DoD. But what does this have to do with the issue?
Your formula of years of idealistic thinking has obviously not worked as illegals continue to cross in increasing numbers.
---
My formula has never been implemented so how could it have possibly failed?
You're not much for linear thinking, obviously....
So help us out what would YOU do to solve this?
----
Well, I think several things need to be done in concert with each other for us to get where we need to be on this issue.
And, having thought many years on the matter, believe I have a formula that, if implemented, would achieve what we want here.
But the partisanship in our system prohibits any consensus on the mechanism, so it will not happen.
The fact that it's contraband guarantees felonious profit which will always draw a never-ending chain of criminals determined to have it.
But that doesn't mean we should just roll over, give up, stop fighting crime, and legalize every harmful substance known to man.