Poll: Will Arizona's Tough Immigration Law Lead to Racial Profiling?

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that one aspect of Arizona's tough stance immigration law is constitutional, three provisions are not.

Imagine driving around and being pulled over, not for any traffic infraction, or because of the condition of your car, but simply because of the color of your skin, the music you are playing, your facial features, or even the language you are speaking?

This is what some opponents of Arizona's S.B. 1070 say will happen with the law that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled today to be constitutional on one provision and unconstitutional on three others.

The law would allow police officials in Arizona to determine the immigration status, basically with everyone whom they come in contact with if they suspect that they are in the country illegally.

The Supreme Court however struck down the provisions in the law that made it a crime for immigrants to not carry immigration documents, prevents illegal immigrants from working in the country and allows for arrests without warrants in certain instances.

Proponents of the law say that it's necessary to combat a problem that perhaps is more intense in the border state and that is not sufficiently regulated by the federal government.

The law now goes back to the lower courts for an injunction to be lifted so that it can take into affect.

Although this is happening in Arizona, this is an issue that could affect nearly every city in California, including Suisun City.

Where do you stand on Arizona's tough approach on immigration? Should California follow suit? Why or why not? Is this law racist?

Don't forget to comment and answer our poll question.

Follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook.

DAVID CASEY June 26, 2012 at 04:01 PM
In this diverse multicultural society, everyone is suspect. I am Irish, my wife is Hispanic, and both of us were born in the USA. We carry valid California and military ID cards and use them daily at Travis AFB, the credit union and any other time we have to validate who we are. We are proud to be an American. If others who cannot present valid credentials, then they need to be in question.
B. Smith June 28, 2012 at 01:58 PM
Their proximity to the border certainly does make it highly suspect. My belief is the law was primarily created to address the illegal population of one nationality. While I think anyone from any country who is here illegally should either have that rectified or be charged with a crime, the American laws of equality still should apply. I am glad they will not be randomly stopping people for the purpose of finding out their citizenship. Stops without cause are illegal, period. Why would they remove the portion regarding working in the U.S., though? I thought that was Federal law, so State law can follow suit. Overall, I do think the government needs to address the concern of illegal immigrants and that it should be done in a way that fully supports the foundation of the American Constitution, equality.
DAVID CASEY June 29, 2012 at 05:43 AM
The Supreme Court ruling on the emigration situation is confusing, and law enforcement officials will be in doubt of doing their job to determine the legal status of anyone they challenge. It is not a crime if someone does not have valid credentials on their person, so what proof is required to prove thei legal status? Racial profiling will no doubt become a subject of controversy for a long time, especially in states that have multicultural communities unless the laws are made specific and enforceable.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »