There has been a tremendous amount of controversy about the law recently passed in Arizona that requires police to check a person’s immigration status if they are already in “lawful contact” with the officer, and the officer has “reasonable suspicion” that the individual is not a US citizen. That enforcing our laws has moved from the realm of common sense into the realm of controversy is remarkable.
Riots and vandalism followed the signing of the new law in Arizona, though recent polling shows that 70% of Arizona residents are supportive of the measure. Nationwide, 60% support it and 68% of Minnesotans are in favor.
In Minneapolis, SEIU and a number of pro-illegal-immigration groups gathered outside the Minneapolis Hilton to protest the Minnesota Family Council’s annual fundraising dinner. The event featured Governor Pawlenty and keynote speaker, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. Immigration wasn’t on the agenda inside the event, and Minnesota has no law like Arizona’s, but that didn’t seem to matter to the gathering of protestors seeking a high-profile target for their ire over Arizona’s new law.
Speakers at the small protest rally made claims about the impact of the bill that, putting it nicely were erroneous. One speaker claimed (in English and then repeated in Spanish) that now, wherever anyone went, even if they were wearing trunks, swimming in a pool or lake, if a police officer asked for their “papers,” and they didn’t have them on their person, they would go straight to jail. This claim was met by muttering and displeasure from the crowd, but it’s simply not true. Arizona’s law requires that a person already be detained by the police for some reason, and it requires that the officer have reason to believe the individual is not legally present in the US. In addition, the law expressly forbids using a person’s appearance as the sole criteria for “reasonable suspicion” as defined in the law.
Although Minnesota has no law like Arizona’s there have been attempts to bring similar legislation in recent years. The Minnesota legislature mustered a bill similar to the Arizona law in 2009, but it was not passed. The year before that, a bill was introduced that would prohibit so-called “sanctuary city” policies, like Minneapolis and St. Paul have enacted. These sanctuary ordinances are essentially the polar opposite of Arizona’s new illegal immigration law. They expressly forbid law enforcement officers, under any circumstances, to inquire about a person’s immigration status.
Illegal immigration in Minnesota hasn’t reached the devastating proportions Arizona is experiencing, but it is a costly problem. A 2005 report to Governor Pawlenty estimated that illegal aliens are costing Minnesota Taxpayers between $180 and $345 million per year. In some small towns, hospital emergency rooms and public schools have been overwhelmed by a large influx of illegal aliens those communities are not equipped to cope with, forcing some emergency rooms to close, and taxpayers are funding some health care services to illegal aliens.
According to WCCO Channel 4 News, half of the illegal aliens present in the state are from African countries; 27% from Asia and 10% from Latin/Central America (leaving about 13% from all other parts of the world).
Immigration is a good thing. Our nation was built on immigration, but what’s happening in Arizona and other parts of the country isn’t immigration. It’s more like an invasion. Drug dealers, gangsters, racist radicals and human traffickers are crossing the border with impunity and flaunting the laws of the United States.
Some illegal aliens are just coming here to look for work and try to make a better life for themselves, which is what America is all about. We live in the land of opportunity, but the process has to be orderly and measured. Our unprotected, wide-open borders and lack of immigration enforcement allows a dangerous criminal element into our neighborhoods along with those looking for peaceful prosperity. Only by securing the border, and rigorously enforcing our immigration laws can we ensure that we are admitting honest people who will participate in American civic life and in bettering themselves, make the United States a better place, while keeping out those who would threaten our prosperity and security.
There is a process to legally enter the United States, and become a citizen. We should welcome those immigrants who respect our laws and embrace them as our brethren. They are fellow Americans and it’ll be rare to find a natural-born citizen who is more appreciative and protective of the liberty and opportunity America offers. Those of us who were born here often too easily take these things for granted, but the legal immigrant will live the American Dream to the fullest. The illegal alien who does not respect our nation, our borders or our laws, however contributes little, if anything and is often a drain on our resources.
Those who advocate for dismantling immigration enforcement try to blur or eradicate the line between legal and illegal immigrants, but the distinction couldn’t be clearer.
After Arizona enacted it’s new immigration enforcement policy, the government of Mexico strongly objected, threatening to cut off trade with the state. Representatives of Mexico called the law “racist,” and they want the US to drop our guard around the borders, but is there reciprocity?
The penalties for illegal immigration to Mexico are severe. First-time offenders are fined and deported (Mexico annually deports more illegal aliens from within it’s borders than the United States does) and may be imprisoned for 2 years. A person caught unlawfully present in Mexico a second time is subject to imprisonment for 10 years. Visa violations are punishable by 6 years in a Mexican prison.
Even legal immigrants to Mexico are second-class residents. Non-citizen residents are not allowed to own land in large swaths of Mexico and becoming a citizen is difficult. The citizen selection process in Mexico is discriminatory as well. Central Americans from south of Mexico’s border who live in Mexico for two years are eligible to apply for citizenship. A person from north of the border (ie: the United States) must live in Mexico for 5 years via a complex and costly visa process that’s always at the pleasure of Mexican immigration officials. Further, anyone desiring Mexican citizenship must pass a Mexican civics and history exam and a Spanish competency test. That’s right. They require immigrants to learn the laws, language and culture of the country they are seeking citizenship in. How novel.
Despite having some of the toughest immigration laws on the planet, the president of Mexico had the hypocritical audacity to howl when a state in the US dared to enforce our nation’s much less stringent immigration laws to deal with an out of control rise in violent crime stemming from illegal aliens.
The most fundamental function of any national government is preserving and protecting it’s borders. Our federal government has failed in that task so spectacularly that the states are forced to deal with illegal immigration on their own and Minnesota’s own policies on illegal immigration are sorely lacking, but not for a lack of effort by some lawmakers.
In 2008, a bill was introduced to prohibit cities from enacting the so-called “sanctuary city” policies that tie the hands of local law enforcement officers, forbidding them to investigate immigration violations. The bill was defeated by the DFL-majority in the legislature. Also in 2008, a bill was proposed that would require prison officials to report to ICE when an inmate’s citizenship status could not be confirmed. Again, the DFL majority shot the bill down.
Our situation isn’t as dire, but Minnesota could learn a lesson from Arizona. It’s time to untie the hands of our law enforcement officers and let them do their jobs. For a city in the great state of Minnesota to literally offer sanctuary for law-breakers and fugitives should not be tolerated.