Sunday, June 13, 2010

White Nationalist State Sen. Russell Pearce Attacking Citizen Latino Children Next in Arizona reports:
"Anchor babies" isn't a very endearing term, but in Arizona those are the words being used to tag children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. While not new, the term is increasingly part of the local vernacular because the primary authors of the nation's toughest and most controversial immigration law are targeting these tots — the legal weights that anchor many undocumented aliens in the U.S. — for their next move.

Buoyed by recent public opinion polls suggesting they're on the right track with illegal immigration, Arizona Republicans will likely introduce legislation this fall that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona — and thus American citizens according to the U.S. Constitution — to parents who are not legal U.S. citizens. The law largely is the brainchild of state Sen. Russell Pearce, a Republican whose suburban district, Mesa, is considered the conservative bastion of the Phoenix political scene. He is a leading architect of the Arizona law that sparked outrage throughout the country: Senate Bill 1070, which allows law enforcement officers to ask about someone's immigration status during a traffic stop, detainment or arrest if reasonable suspicion exists — things like poor English skills, acting nervous or avoiding eye contact during a traffic stop.
But the likely new bill is for the kids. While SB 1070 essentially requires of-age migrants to have the proper citizenship paperwork, the potential "anchor baby" bill blocks the next generation from ever being able to obtain it. The idea is to make the citizenship process so difficult that illegal immigrants pull up the "anchor" and leave.

The question is whether that would violate the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment states that "all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." It was intended to provide citizenship for freed slaves and served as a final answer to the Dred Scott case, cementing the federal government's control over citizenship.

But that was 1868. Today, Pearce says the 14th Amendment has been "hijacked" by illegal immigrants. "They use it as a wedge," Pearce says. "This is an orchestrated effort by them to come here and have children to gain access to the great welfare state we've created." Pearce says he is aware of the constitutional issues involved with the bill and vows to introduce it nevertheless. "We will write it right." He and other Republicans in the red state Arizona point to popular sympathy: 58% of Americans polled by Rasmussen think illegal immigrants whose children are born here should not receive citizenship; support for that stance is 76% among Republicans.

Those who oppose the bill say it would lead to more discrimination and divide the community. Among them is Phoenix resident Susan Vie, who is leading a citizen group that's behind an opposing ballot initiative. She moved to the U.S. 30 years ago from Argentina, became a naturalized citizen and now works as a client-relations representative for a vaccine company. "I see a lot of hate and racism behind it," Vie says. "Consequently, I believe it will create — and it's creating it now — a separation in our society." She adds, "When people look at me, they will think, 'Is she legal or illegal?' I can already feel it right now." Vie's citizen initiative would prohibit SB 1070 from taking affect, place a three-year moratorium on all related laws — including the anchor baby bill — to buy more time for federal immigration reform. Her group is racing to collect 153,365 signatures by July 1 to qualify for the Nov. 2 general election.

Both sides expect the anchor baby bill to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court before it is enacted. "I think it would be struck down as facially unconstitutional. I can't imagine a federal judge saying this would be OK," says Dan Barr, a longtime Phoenix lawyer and constitutional litigator. Potentially joining the anchor baby bill at the Supreme Court may be SB 1070, which Arizona Republican Governor Jan Brewer signed into law in April. It is set to take effect July 29, but at least five courtroom challenges have been filed against it. Pearce says he will win them all.


Bill O. said...

"Senate Bill 1070, which allows law enforcement officers to ask about someone's immigration status during a traffic stop, detainment or arrest if reasonable suspicion exists — things like poor English skills, acting nervous or avoiding eye contact during a traffic stop".

WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! As long as the person stopped can provide a valid I.D. which in the case of a traffic stop would be a valid driver's license no further questioning about one's status in this country can occur regardless of one's lack of good English skills, nervousness or lack of eye contact.

Anyone who would act nervous while presenting valid I.D. might be guilty of another crime but not be illegal in this country. Get your facts straight, lady.

Bill O. said...

Attacking citizen Latino children? You do know that children are born from illegal parents who are not Latino, don't you? Why are you making this just a Latino issue?

It is time we followed the numerous other country's policies in regards to birthright citizenship and that is that at least one parent has to be a citizen of this country. What American in their right mind would want to continue to grant citizenship to children of illegal aliens? Is that how little you value our precious citizenship?

Dee said...

Bill O,
Apparently you are not keeping up with what Arpaio and his masked goons are doing in Latino neighborhoods. A valid driver's license is NOT enough. He has hog tied citizen latinos on the side of the road for hours and hours and forced them to pee on the side of the road until his masked goons felt satisfied they tortured them enough. This is all part of Congressional testimony. I've printed it on my blog before.

He never does this in non-Latino neighborhoods!

Dee said...

Yes Bill-O. I do know Canadians have "anchor babies" quite often, however your side never attacks them. They only attack the Brown ones.

Also, you SAY you abide by the RULE OF LAW. The 14th Ammendment (Jus Soli) is the RULE OF LAW.
You just CHOOSE the Rule of Laws you LIKE.

It sounds like you prefer Jus Sanguines (look it up in wiki). You would have to change the 14th Ammendment to do so and you don't have the votes.

They are Citizens. Respect them!

Bill O. said...

Do you have a link that proves that citizens of this country have been detained in such a manner even though they provided valid I.D. to law enforcement rather than suspicious or no I.D.? Me thinks the whole story isn't being told here.

Wanting to change a law is not being against the rule of law. I abide by our laws in their present form until or if they are changed. Do you? You want our immigration laws changed. I want birthright citizenship changed. How does that make you any different than me? The difference is that I abide by our laws as they are written today but wanting them changed does not make one against the rule of law.

The Latinos neighborhoods are where most of the illegals are. Should Arapio be looking for them in predominantly black or white neighborhoods? What kind of logic is that?

Dee said...

Well Bill O, given you are NEW here, I will give you the link to several examples of citizens being racially profiled. Most of my readers are very familiar with the heinous actions of arpaio and his masked goons.

Since you are new here, I'll provide you the link to past coverage:

arpaio routinely racially profiles and abuses citizens. He is currently under DOJ investigation for his abuses.

Dee said...

Bill O said: Wanting to change a law is not being against the rule of law.

I agree. I want to CHANGE the Jim Crow-like laws and STOP Jim-Crow like laws = sb1070.

Dee said...

Bill O' said:
"The Latinos neighborhoods are where most of the illegals are. Should Arapio be looking for them in predominantly black or white neighborhoods? What kind of logic is that?"

Arpaio routinely racially profiles latino citizens in their neighborhoods, cuffing them on the side of the road, holding them for hours, DL is not enough; making them pee on the side of the road.

It is disparate, cruel and unusual treatment also known as racial profiling. It is against the RULE OF LAW! Yet YOU support it. I thought you only supported RULE of LAW! Nope!

Bill O. said...

Don't words in my mouth! I never said that I am for citizens being cuffed for no reason. Please point out where I said that. I will look at your link but as I said I think there is more to the story than you are willing to admit. There are missing pieces I am sure. Have you ever bothered to find out the entire story from the cops themselves? I doubt it.

Until Arapio is convicted (mere investigations don't count) he is innocent till proven guilty just like everyone else.

1070 has nothing to do with Jim Crow laws.

Dee said...

It should come right up but just google this:

SB1070 Racial Profiling: Pictures to Remember! Masked Volunteer Goons! Racial Profiling!

Bill O. said...

Sorry, but links leading back to your blog with captions under the pictures depicting only one side of the story doesn't cut it for me. Where is a link to the actual testimony from both sides of the stories? We must hear both sides of the story in order to make a fair assessment of what occured. Until you are able to do that it is just biasness on your part and closed mindedness towards law enforcement's side of the story.

Dee said...

Bill O,
There were links in that post. Plus on any youtube video picture, just go to youtube and enter the name of the video in search and it comes up.

The truth is the truth. If you can't handle the truth, then you should not be involved in this discussion or support sb1070.

Regarding Racial Profiling: (google: Maricopa County Sheriff's Office controversies wiki)

Racial profiling
The MCSO has been accused of racial profiling in lawsuits filed by the ACLU. In one suit, the ACLU alleges that MCSO Deputies arrested and detained U.S. citizen and a legal resident without justification, stopping them as they were driving down a public roadway, and transporting them to the site of an immigration raid.[6] A separate class-action suit, filed by the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) alleges that MCSO Deputies unlawfully stopped and mistreated individuals because they were Latino. The lawsuit charges that this practice is discriminatory and unlawfully violates the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Arizona Constitution.[7]

Federal investigations
In March 2009, the United States Department of Justice notified Arpaio of that they were investigating him for civil rights violations, in unfairly targeting Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people.[40]

In October 2009, it was reported that the FBI was investigating Arpaio for using his position to settle political vendettas.[45]

In January 2010, it was reported that the Department of Justice has impaneled a grand jury to investigate allegations of abuse of power by Arpaio.[46]

In March 2010, it was reported that an investigation into Arpaio is "serious and ongoing", according to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.[47]

Improper clearance of MCSO cases
Reports show that, under Arpaio, the MCSO may be improperly clearing as many as 75% of cases without arrest or proper investigation.[48][49][50][dead link][51] The sheriff's office has failed to properly investigate serious crimes, including the rape of a 14 year old girl by classmates,[52][53] the rape of a 15 year old girl by two strangers,[54][55] and the rape of a 13 year old girl by her father.[54][56][dead link] These cases were "exceptionally cleared" without investigation or even identifying a suspect in one case which are not in accordance with the FBI standards for exceptional clearance.[54][57

Inmate complaints and lawsuits
From 2004 through November 2007, Arpaio was the target of 2,150 lawsuits in U.S. District Court and hundreds more in Maricopa County courts, with more than $50 million in claims being filed,[65] 50 times as many prison-conditions lawsuits as the New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston jail systems combined.[66] Allegations of cruel treatment of inmates as well as living conditions have been cited by Amnesty International in a report issued on the treatment of inmates in Maricopa County facilities.[67]

Inmate deaths and injuries
Family members of inmates who have died or been injured in jail custody have filed lawsuits against the sheriff’s office. Maricopa County has paid more than $43 million in settlement claims during Arpaio's tenure. [69]

Critical organizations
Arpaio's practices have been criticized by organizations such as Amnesty International,[67] the American Civil Liberties Union, the Arizona Ecumenical Council, the American Jewish Committee,[90] and the Arizona chapter of the Anti-Defamation League.[91] The editorial board of The New York Times called Arpaio "America's Worst Sheriff".[92]

Bill O. said...

I can most certainly handle the truth if I hear both sides of the story. Can you?

Since Arapio hasn't been convicted of racial profiling you have no leg to stand on except biased hearsay. I am a bit more intelligent than that. Are you?

So if I locate the links within your old topic (didn't see any offhand) will it link me to an unbiased site that tells both sides of the story or will it reflect a biased view from only one side?

No need to hurl accusations at me either. I would think respect would be earned for those who are intelligent enough to listen to both sides of the story, don't you think? For every argument there is a counter argument and explanation or are you not willing to hear the whole story unless it fits your agenda? I am glad that I am not biased or close minded until I hear the whole truth. Can you do the same?

Bill O. said...

Is this the topic I am supposed to find links in? There were no links to click on and I even clicked on the pictures and the u-tube but nothing.

Where is the other side of these stories or didn't you bother to seek them out? In order for anyone to make a rational judgement one has to know both sides of a story/incident.

Dee said...

Well Bill, let me help you. First, go to google.

1. Picture 1: enter "julio mora father julian testified before congress" a whole slew of articles will come up.

2. Picture 2: go to youtube. In search Enter "arpaio's first victim of 2009" The video I referenced will pull up first. But after that, you will see several news videos that illustrate arpaio's abuses/racial profiling.

3. Picture 3: go to google Images (at the top of the google page): Enter in search: "arpaio's masked deputies".

4. Picture 4: google: "virdiana ramirez" a number of articles will come up.

5. Picture 5: google: "arpaio guadalupe confirmation mass" the 1st article has the picture but you have to click on cache

You see, Bill O', as my longtime readers know and understand, I always research my facts and report them accurately.

Bill O. said...

There was no proof of anything being illegally done by law enforcement in any of these stories, pictures or videos. As I said, and apparently you aren't interested in learing about is that there are two sides to every story. You choose to believe those who's illegal immigration views are the same as yours and those who are here illegally in this country rather than seeking out the whole story and giving law enforcement the benefit of the doubt. There is nothing I can do for you since you have made up your mind based on ethnic bias rather than the rule of law. Bye.

Dee said...

Sorry Bill O.
Here is where you are totally off base.

When BTK, Bundy, Gacy, Vandersloot, Peterson, etc. were charged, THERE WAS PLENTY OF EVIDENCE. PLENTY OF IT. ALL VALID.

Once they were found guilty, they went to prison and served their time.

There is plenty of video and witness testimony that are PROOF of Arpaio's guilt. However, unlike the undocumented, Arpaio WILL have his day in court. He will have an opportunity to refute the testimony, the videos, the facts.

You choose to lay guilt on the undocumented who have never had a day in court.

Unlike you, I am awaiting the DAY IN COURT for Arpaio, when ALL OF THE EVIDENCE is layed out before the American Public, and, I am awaiting the day when he is finally found GUILTY, held ACCOUNTABLE for all of his racial profiling an ALL of his crimes; AND I AM AWAITING THE DAY he serves his time for his crimes.

I can hardly wait!

God Bless America!
God Bless our President Obama!

BunBun4life said...

FINE, then, deport the parents and allow the children to be adopted out. Fuck you.

Page Hits