Latin American nations bid to join Mexico in Arizona case

PHOENIX Seven other Latin American countries want to join Mexico in supporting a lawsuit challenging Arizona’s immigration enforcement law.Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Peru filed separate, nearly identical motions to join Mexico’s legal brief supporting the lawsuit filed by U.S. civil rights and other advocacy groups.A federal judge formally accepted Mexico’s filing July 1 but did not immediately rule on the latest motions filed late last week.

Mexico says the law would lead to racial profiling and hinder trade, tourism and the fight against drug trafficking.The law is to take effect June 29. It requires that police conducting traffic stops or questioning people about possible legal violations ask them about their immigration status if there is “reasonable suspicion” that they’re in the country illegally. (AP)

Arizona police officials warned officers not to use race or ethnicity when enforcing the state's new immigration law

PHOENIX Arizona police officials warned officers not to use race or ethnicity when enforcing the state’s new immigration law, saying that the country is watching their every move.In a new training video released Thursday, the officials said opponents of the law may secretly videotape officers making traffic stops, trying to ensnare them and prove that they’re racially profiling Hispanics.”Without a doubt, we’re going to be accused of racial profiling no matter what we do on this,” Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor tells officers on the video from Arizona’s police licensing board. The video is designed to teach officers how to determine when they can ask a person for proof they’re in the country legally.Officers can consider that someone doesn’t speak English well, is wearing several layers of clothing in a hot climate or is hanging out in an area where illegal immigrants are known to look for work, according to the video.

They can take into account that a person doesn’t have identification, tried to run away, is traveling in an overcrowded vehicle, or seems out of place and unfamiliar with the area.But the stakes for making a mistake are high: Officers can be fired if they start asking questions because of a person’s race, then lie about it later, the video warns.”It is also clear that the actions of Arizona officers will never come under this level of scrutiny again,” said Lyle Mann, executive director of the training agency. “Each and every one of you will now carry the reputation for the entire Arizona law enforcement community with you every day.

“Arizona’s law, sparked by anger over a surging population of illegal immigrants in the border state, generally requires officers enforcing another law to question a person’s immigration status if there’s a reasonable suspicion that the person is in the country illegally.Officers are told that the law applies only to a stop, detention or arrest – not when a person flags down an officer. Police are not required to ask crime victims or witnesses about their status, and anyone who shows a valid Arizona driver’s license is presumed to be in the country legally.The law restricts the use of race, color or national origin as the basis for triggering immigration questions.

But civil rights groups and some police officials argue that officers will still assume that illegal immigrants look Hispanic.Arizona’s 460,000 illegal immigrants are almost all Hispanic. Yet Arizona also has nearly 2 million Hispanics who are U.S. citizens or legal residents, about 30 percent of the state’s population.In the training video, an expert advises officers to ask themselves whether they’d reach the same conclusion about a Hispanic person’s immigration status if the subject were white or black.”If any officer goes into a situation with a previous mindset that one race or one ethnicity is not equal to another’s, then they have no business being a law enforcement officer in this state,” Arizona Police Association president Brian Livingston says in the video.

The video and supporting paperwork will be sent to all 170 Arizona police agencies.Police bosses 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 July 29.Gov. Jan Brewer ordered the Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board to develop the training when she signed the law April 23.Opponents have challenged the measure as unconstitutional and have asked that a federal court block it from taking effect. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton plans to hear arguments on the request later this month.

President Barack Obama on Thursday called the law an understandable byproduct of public frustration with the government’s inability to tighten the system, but also said it is ill-conceived, divisive and would put undue pressure on local authorities.

The law was passed in part with the lobbying muscle of unions representing rank-and-file police officers who argued that they should be allowed to arrest illegal immigrants they come across.It was opposed by police bosses who worried it would be expensive to implement and would destroy the trust they’ve developed in Hispanic neighborhoods. (AP)

Az Promises of Fairness ''Ring Hollow to Many Latinos''

Randal Archibold, who has led the paper’s slanted, whitewashed coverage of Arizona’s fierce illegal immigration fight, again focused the feelings of the minority, not the majority of Americans, talking to Latinos in Phoenix for Friday’s “Arizona Law Is Stoking Unease Among Latinos.” His concluding verdict: “many Latinos remain unconvinced.”Among those Archibold interviewed was someone who “spray painted himself white and wrote on his body, ‘Am I reasonably suspicious?'” (Monica Almeida captured the image for the Times.) Who could fail to be swayed by such an argument?  When Gov. Jan Brewer signed Arizona’s new immigration enforcement law, giving police departments broad power to make immigration checks, she sought to allay concerns from Hispanic citizens and legal residents that they would be singled out for scrutiny.

“We have to trust our law enforcement,” Ms. Brewer said. “It’s simple reality. Police officers are going to be respectful. They understand what their jobs are. They’ve taken an oath, and racial profiling isn’t legal.”Those words ring hollow to many Latinos, including Jesus Ruiz, 25, a college student in Mesa, Ariz., who, like many Latinos here, believes that all too often the police view them suspiciously and single them out for what they consider questionable stops or harassment.

In one stop in 2004, Mr. Ruiz said, an officer pulled him over for speeding 10 miles over the limit and went on to question him on where he was going to school and whether he lived with his parents, and finally asked for his Social Security number.“I was thinking, is he supposed to be asking me for that and all these questions for a speeding ticket?” said Mr. Ruiz, who spray painted himself white and wrote on his body, “Am I reasonably suspicious?” at a recent protest against the new law, which goes into effect in late July.But it is not just young people.

Archibold then told an anecdote from a Phoenix judge who has been pulled over twice for traffic infractions, but not given a ticket, which somehow adds up to…something or other.Judge Jose Padilla of Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenix, says that twice since he became a judge in 2006, the police have pulled him over, alleging minor traffic infractions. Even though Judge Padilla, 60, did not disclose his occupation, he ended up not receiving a ticket. He said his complaints to the police department led to sensitivity training for the officers.

Though the law isn’t even being enforced yet, Archibold managed to collect reports of immigrant harassment:

Already, he said, there are anecdotal reports that some police departments in the state are asking people for their papers. He said his department had received a picture of a patrol car near a Border Patrol vehicle, as if proximity proved that officers were already collaborating to carry out the law.Between rehashing recent incidents showing “tensions between law enforcement and some Latinos” in Arizona, talk of lawsuits and “roundups” of illegals, and a cameo by Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Archibold didn’t get to any supporters of the law (who are the clear majority both in Arizona and nationwide) until paragraph 31 out of 37).

Still, many Arizonans who support the law believe racial profiling concerns are overblown or a smokescreen to hide a belief that borders should be wide open.Archibold concluded with this less than shocking statement: “But many Latinos remain unconvinced.”A sidebar article by Larry Rohter (a fiercely pro-Obama reporter from the 2008 campaign) offered the less than earth-shattering news that some leftist musicians are boycotting Arizona in protest of the law, led by Zach de la Rocha of Rage Against the Machine.

Michigan lawmaker believes the state's law enforcement officers need the authority to arrest illegal immigrants

LANSINGA Michigan lawmaker believes the state’s law enforcement officers need the authority to arrest illegal immigrants and is drafting legislation similar to Arizona’s new immigration law.Rep. Kim Meltzer, R-Clinton Township, said her bill would allow police to request proof of citizenship from people who are stopped and questioned on another offense, such as a traffic violation or selling fraudulent identity documents. Officers would have the authority to arrest people who can’t prove their legal status.”We have borders in place for a reason,” Meltzer said. “Everyone should play by the rules.”

Meltzer, who’s a candidate for state Senate in the August primary election, said racial profiling — a key fear among opponents of Arizona’s law — would not be tolerated. She said a driver’s license would be reasonable proof that a person was legally living in the U.S.The Arizona law approved last month empowers local police to question anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally. It has triggered a heated national debate, touched off protests and prompted some states to look at their own laws.

Meltzer said that when the federal government ignores its border patrol responsibilities, it presents “a financial liability for our states, local communities and schools.”Her plan has already garnered strong reaction.”This is absolutely unacceptable,” said Emily Diaz-Torres, executive director of the new Macomb Hispanic and International Service Center in New Haven. “If it’s anything like the Arizona law, we will definitely fight it.”

Shelli Weisberg, legislative director for American Civil Liberties Union in Michigan, said the group would fight Meltzer’s bill in the Legislature and in court if necessary.”We don’t want an Arizona-style bill. It encourages racial profiling,” Weisberg said, adding that such a law would put Michigan out of step with other states.

But Ken Grabowski, legislative director for the Police Officers Association of Michigan, said a law giving local police more authority is “probably something that needs to be done.””In many instances, if police find someone who is here illegally, they take them to the local (Immigration and Naturalization Service) office, and the person is given an appearance notice for a later date. But nobody ever shows up. It’s a farce,” he said.

There is no official estimate of the number of illegal immigrants in Michigan, state demographer Ken Darga said, adding that the counting process “is pretty imprecise.”Meltzer said Michigan law enforcement officers have been left with the responsibility to protect the state against those who sneak across the U.S.-Canadian border.Federal border officials allocated about $20 million a year ago for 11 cameras to be set up along the St. Clair River to watch for illegal immigrants crossing from Canada.

Feds may sue over Arizona immigration law

Washington Attorney General Eric Holder said Sunday that the Justice Department was considering a federal lawsuit against Arizona’s new immigration law. “We are considering all of our options. One possibility is filing a lawsuit,” Holder told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” Possible grounds for the lawsuit would be whether the Arizona law could lead to civil rights violations, he said. The recently enacted Arizona law initially allowed police to ask anyone for proof of legal U.S. residency, based solely on a police officer’s suspicion that the person might be in the country illegally.

Arizona lawmakers soon amended the law so that officers could check a person’s status only if the person had been stopped or arrested for another reason. Critics say the law will lead to racial profiling, while supporters say it involves no racial profiling and is needed to crack down on increasing crime involving illegal immigrants. In Arizona , the city councils of Tucson and Flagstaff have decided to challenge the new immigration law in court. Holder told ABC’s “This Week” program that one concern about the Arizona law is that “you’ll end up in a situation where people are racially profiled, and that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement, which leads to the problem of people in those communities not willing to interact with people in law enforcement, not willing to share information, not willing to be witnesses where law enforcement needs them.”

“I think we could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done, and that is, I think, something that we have to try to avoid at all costs,” Holder added. Holder said comprehensive federal immigration reform is the best approach for the problem of illegal immigrants crossing U.S. borders. His stance echoed the approach favored by President Obama, who last week criticized the Arizona law and said he wants Congress to work on the issue this year.

Comprehensive immigration reform would include continuing government efforts to secure borders from illegal immigrants, as well as steps to crack down on businesses that employ them, Obama said at a Cinco de Mayo celebration at the White House. In addition, he said, those living illegally in the United States would have to pay a penalty and any taxes they owe, learn English and “make themselves right with the law” before starting the process of gaining U.S. citizenship.(CNN)