DETROIT — States have the authority to enforce immigration laws and protect their borders, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox said Wednesday in a legal brief on behalf of nine states supporting Arizona’s immigration law.
Cox, one of five Republicans running for Michigan governor, said Michigan is the lead state backing Arizona in federal court and is joined by Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and Virginia, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands.
The Arizona law, set to take effect July 29, directs officers to question people about their immigration status during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic stops and if there’s a reasonable suspicion they’re in the U.S. illegally.
President Barack Obama’s administration recently filed suit in federal court to block it, arguing immigration is a federal issue. The law’s backers say Congress isn’t doing anything meaningful about illegal immigration, so it’s the state’s duty to step up.
“Arizona, Michigan and every other state have the authority to enforce immigration laws, and it is appalling to see President Obama use taxpayer dollars to stop a state’s efforts to protect its own borders,” Cox said in a statement.
Arizona’s Republican Gov. Jan Brewer, in a statement released by Cox’s office, said she was thankful for the support.
A Virginia lawmaker looking to enact an immigration law similar to Arizona’s is challenging the Obama administration to come at his state with a lawsuit, too, saying he hopes the Justice Department has “so many targets” they can’t focus.
Prince William Board of County Supervisors Chairman Corey Stewart told The Washington Post that the Obama administration’s lawsuit against Arizona will probably fall flat. He claimed Arizona is on “firm footing” and encouraged other jurisdictions to follow Arizona’s lead.
“I hope the Justice Department sues Virginia, as well,” he told the Post. “I hope they have so many targets that they are unable to focus on Arizona.”
The Justice Department filed suit against Arizona over its immigration law on Tuesday. The administration — claiming the federal government trumps the states when it comes to immigration enforcement — is trying to halt the law before it goes into effect at the end of July.
But several other cities and states also are looking to enact tough immigration policies. Prince William is well-known for its immigration policy requiring officers to check the immigration status of suspects in custody, but Stewart is pushing for a statewide law.
Arizona legislators are already being criticized for another tough measure they are considering to combat illegal immigration – denying birth certificates to children born to illegal immigrants in the state.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Arizona finds that 64% agree that children born to illegal immigrants should not automatically become citizens of the United States. Twenty-six percent (26%) disagree and say these children should become U.S. citizens.
Nationally, 58% of voters say a child born to an illegal immigrant in this country should not automatically become a citizen of the United States. Thirty-three percent (33%) disagree and say if a women enters the United States illegally and gives birth to a child here, that child should automatically be a U.S. citizen. That’s what the current law allows, and many believe it would require a constitutional amendment to change the law.
In Arizona, there’s virtually no difference of opinion between men and women on this question. Seventy-one percent (71%) of Arizona voters who do not have children living with them oppose automatic citizenship for those born to illegal immigrants. Voters with children in the home are more narrowly divided.
Eighty-four percent (84%) of Republicans and 58% of voters not affiliated with either major party say children born to illegal immigrants in this country should not automatically become U.S. citizens. Democratic voters are almost evenly divided on the question.
Arizona has been criticized by President Obama, major Hispanic groups and the president of Mexico, among others, for its new law that requires local police to check the immigration status of anyone they stop for a traffic violation or other kind of violation if they suspect the person is an illegal immigrant.
Sixty-six percent (66%) of Arizona voters favor that law, while 24% are opposed and 10% are undecided. Since late April when Governor Jan Brewer signed the measure into law, support for it has ranged from 64% to 71%.
Among voters nationwide, 58% favor passage of a law like Arizona’s in their own state.
President Barack Obama hopes to rally new momentum behind the push for an immigration overhaul by explaining why he thinks a comprehensive approach is the only way to fix what he and others say is a system badly in need of repair.
Obama was laying out his rationale in a speech Thursday, his first as president on the issue.
Obama wasn’t expected to announce any new proposals or policy changes. But feeling pressure from a range of supporters, he was aiming to jump-start the effort he had promised to make a priority in his first year and which advocates had hoped would be completed by now.
The speech follows up on back-to-back meetings Obama had with advocates and lawmakers at the White House this week.
Obama has said a comprehensive solution means “accountability for everybody” — from the U.S. government meeting its obligation to secure the border, to businesses facing the consequences of knowingly employing illegal immigrants, to those who enter the country illegally owning up to their actions before they can begin the process of becoming citizens.
[Editor's Commentary: The system that is most in need of repair is our broken border law enforcement system. Obama and his liberal enablers only talk of "comprehensive immigration reform" as a code phrase for "let's naturalize 14-20 million lawbreakers and sign them up as newly minted Democrat voters to replace the 20 million votes we have lost because of our ruinious policies and legislation."
Make no mistake, if Barack "Oil Slick" Obama gets his way on Amnesty, he stays in the White House for four more years and you can only imagine what the country will look like after two full terms with this Corporate Fascist at the helm.]
Thomas Jefferson called slavery, “a fire bell in the night.”
He saw it as one of the seminal causes of the U.S. Civil War, just a few decades away.
In order to form any union, let alone a perfect union, the Founding Fathers finessed the issue of slavery when writing the U.S. Constitution, just as they finessed the issue of states’ rights v. the new central government.
Every other country in the world solved their slave/property disputes via gradual manumission, outright payment, or some form of earned freedom. The U.S. turned to killing one another.
Abraham Lincoln did not oppose the institution of slavery when he sought the Presidency — only the expansion of slavery into the new territories — which, if allowed would trigger additional seats in Congress to the slaveholding states that wanted a transcontinental railroad to be built along southern, not northern lines. Control of Congress also insured the “power of the purse,” and eventual control of the U.S. Supreme Court.
That court, by the way, determines what is constitutional and what is not; i.e., the U.S. Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is.
However, the larger and very complicated constitutional, economic, cultural, political, territorial, and property rights’ issues eventually devolved into that “fire bell in the night” called slavery. Once slavery became a “moral” issue and not a “political and property” issue, it could no longer be compromised, finessed or resolved by any other means short of Civil War.
Arizona: The next Civil War?
Enter Arizona’s new states’ right law to control and enforce illegal immigration problems along its own border. It, too, is a “fire bell in the night.” A warning none can now ignore.
The federal government intends to challenge the Arizona law, arguing that the state lacks “jurisdictional rights” over national boundaries. Arizona will argue the inherent right to protect its state borders, and that if the federal government won’t enforce the law and protect its citizens against illegal entrants, drug smuggling cartels, and possibly terrorists, then the state government must.
Twenty states are now considering following Arizona’s lead. Nebraska (scene of the early warning skirmishes in the last Civil War) has already passed an Arizona-like law.
In California, City Councils are choosing up sides. In northern California, San Francisco has supported “sanctuary city” status for illegals for some time. In southern California, Los Angeles has endorsed a boycott of Arizona, while Hemet passed a resolution supporting the Arizona law and Lake Elsinore passed ordinances to pave the way for tighter illegal immigration policies in that city.
Those states opposing the Arizona law (which mirrors existing federal legislation) have begun boycott campaigns (often hurting the very workers they wish to protect); GPS tracking systems to aid illegals with directions to the next “meet-up,” and border posts to provide food and water to those lost in the 110 degree desert.
Shamefully, both political parties are fanning the flames of entrenched opposition to generate massive campaign contributions, and advance their own political careers.
Below is the text of an email that I received from the illegal immigration watchdog organization, NUMBERSUSA. I have been hearing rumors of another attempt by the lame-duck Obama to cram through an Amnesty against the wishes of the voters and this serves as a confirmation of those rumors.
Obama is the STRANGEST man I have ever seen capture the White House. Unless he agrees with me that he is destined to be a one-term President and unless he feels he has nothing to lose by continuing to defy the voters, what the man does makes no sense whatsoever.
He must know he has no chance of being reelected. It is hard to beleive that anyone adept enough to win a Presidential election has become so tin eared that he doesn’t realize how furious the electorate is at him and his enablers in the Democrat Party.
That is the only explantion I can come up with. He knows he is done and he wants to burnish his legacy as the President who “radically transformed” America.
Here’s hoping we can get this whole situation under control before any more damage is done to the country.
~~John Cronin~~
By: Roy Beck
It seems like it would be against the law for the Administration to order a de facto amnesty for millions of illegal aliens while totally bypassing Congress. But 8 U.S. Senators believe that is what Obama officials are considering right now because most Members of Congress are scared to death to have to VOTE on an amnesty just a few months before elections.
(Read the letter from the Senators to Pres. Obama below.)
Your great success in keeping Congress from voting on a mass amnesty this year has stirred up a new threat.
Seeing that most Members of Congress don’t want to vote for an amnesty this year, Administration officials appear to be considering ways to do a de facto amnesty without involving Congress.
We at NumbersUSA have been hearing about this behind the scenes for a few weeks but haven’t had solid enough evidence to mount a national mobilization against. Now, the whispering has erupted with an open letter to the President from 8 U.S. Senators spelling out the details known thus far.
In a nutshell, there is discussion going on within the Administration about stopping nearly all deportations, presumably until “comprehensive immigration reform” can be passed to give illegal aliens full work and residency rights permanently. The point here is to satisfy the open-border bloc of voters who have been threatening to boycott the elections this fall unless Pres. Obama makes an all-out effort to pass an amnesty this year.
RELIGIOUS LEADERS HINTED AT THIS EXECUTIVE-BRANCH AMNESTY LAST WEEK
I am guessing that this is what religious leaders were hinting at the Brookings conference I attended last week.
They indicated that they had been talking with Administration officials about a way to help illegal aliens without having to deal with Congress. They then said they had better not say any more about it.
Friends, U.S. Presidents have proven whether Republican or Democrat that they are capable of doing almost anything they please until they come up for re-election. Only an incredible outburst of outrage from the public can stop the Administration from doing a de facto amnesty all by itself.
Make sure you have sent a free fax to the President and then to your 3 Members of Congress decrying any Executive-Order Amnesty.
We need all 535 Members of Congress to know about the De Facto Amnesty Plot — and to know that you know.
* We want Democrats in Congress to begin to tell their Leaders and the White House that even the hint that this amnesty could happen will hurt their chances of winning in the fall.
* We want Republicans to start threatening to use the Plot as a campaign issue.
* We want the White House to publicly promise that it will NOT unilaterally proclaim an amnesty.
* Short of that, we want to see the White House forced to deny over and over that such a plot is even underway.
NumbersUSA promises to spread the word far and wide now that these 8 Senators have come forward with what they know of the amnesty plot.
LETTER FROM 8 SENATORS
Dear President Obama:
We understand that there’s a push for your Administration to develop a plan to unilaterally extend either deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. We understand that the Administration may include aliens who have willfully overstayed their visas or filed for benefits knowing that they will not be eligible for a status for years to come. We understand that deferred action and parole are discretionary actions reserved for individual cases that present unusual, emergent or humanitarian circumstances. Deferred action and parole were not intended to be used to confer a status or offer protection to large groups of illegal aliens, even if the agency claims that they look at each case on a “case-by-case” basis.
While we agree our immigration laws need to be fixed, we are deeply concerned about the potential expansion of deferred action or parole for a large illegal alien population. While deferred action and parole are Executive Branch authorities, they should not be used to circumvent Congress’ constitutional authority to legislate immigration policy, particularly as it relates to the illegal population in the United States.
The Administration would be wise to abandon any plans for deferred action or parole for the illegal population. Such a move would further erode the American public’s confidence in the federal government and its commitment to securing the borders and enforcing the laws already on the books.
We would appreciate receiving a commitment that the Administration has no plans to use either authority to change the current position of a large group of illegal aliens already in the United States, and ask that you respond to us about this matter as soon as possible.
(signed by)
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. Hatch (R-Utah)
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.)
Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.)
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.)
Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.)
Many news organizations are asking for the proof that these Senators have that the amnesty plot is really being discussed inside the Administration.
We are sure that the 8 Senators have heard the same reports from inside the Administration that we have heard — about studying what administrative tools they might modify to by-pass Congress. This doesn’t mean the President has an actual plan yet. But we feel there is a real threat. And we are certain that the 8 Senators would not have gone public with their concerns if they did not have inside information of discussions about this de facto amnesty.
The time to stop any chance of a plan is right now while it is still in discussion stage (or maybe in final discussion stage).
ROY BECK is Founder & CEO of NumbersUSA
NumbersUSA’s blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA.
Seventy-one percent (71%) of Likely Voters in Pennsylvania support sending U.S. troops to the border with Mexico to help prevent illegal immigration, according to a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in the state.
Sixteen percent (16%) are opposed to such a move, while 14% are not sure.
Nationally, 79% of voters believe the U.S. military should be used on the country’s southern border for that purpose.
President Obama is sending troops to the Mexican border but says they are there only to prevent Mexican drug violence from spilling into this country.
The survey of 500 Likely Voters in Pennsylvania was conducted on June 2, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.5% percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.
The increased national debate on illegal immigration is clearly linked to the recent law passed in Arizona, which most Pennsylvanians support.
Just 22% of voters in the state believe that the U.S. Department of Justice should challenge the legality of the Arizona law. But 58% oppose such a challenge, comparable to views nationally. Twenty percent (20%) are undecided.
Women and voters under 30 are more willing to challenge the Arizona law.
Republicans are more likely than Democrats to support sending troops to the border.
PHOENIX (AP) - The Obama administration plans to announce Tuesday that it will send as many as 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border to improve border security, an Arizona congresswoman said.
Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords also said in a statement released Tuesday that President Barack Obama will request $500 million in funding for border security.
Part of Giffords’ district borders Mexico.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer’s spokesman said the governor hadn’t been told of the move prior to her office being contacted by The Associated Press and had no immediate comment.
In 2006, President George W. Bush sent thousands of troops to the border to perform support duties that tie up immigration agents. The troops wouldn’t perform significant law enforcement duties.
That program has since ended, and politicians in border states have called for troops to be sent there to curb human and drug smuggling and prevent Mexico’s drug violence from spilling over into the United States.
Associated Press writer Paul Davenport contributed to this report.
The Obama administration appears to be unable to distinguish between the reasonable Arizona immigration law and the acts of merciless dictators in China. It’s a vivid illustration of Obama’s ‘Blame America First’ policy.
A State Department official has all but validated concerns that the Obama administration sees the United States as an unexceptional nation, morally equivalent to the world’s authoritarian countries and best served by self-loathing and supplication to tyrants for its purported sins. That is the implication of a dialogue between Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner and the communist government of China last week.
Posner, who runs the democracy and human rights bureau at the State Department, met with officials from Beijing on May 13 and 14 for the “U.S.-China Human Rights Dialogue.” The forum was suspended for much of the previous administration because the Chinese government claimed its mere participation proved it took human rights seriously, even as the treatment of people within its borders worsened. Now Beijing has not only benefited from the veneer of legitimacy bestowed by the dialogue—it apparently has found a venue in which the U.S. conveniently flagellates itself.
At a briefing after the dialogue, Posner was asked by a reporter if the Chinese side brought up the recently passed Arizona law pertaining to illegal immigrants. To the surprise of those gathered, Posner remarked: “We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination, and that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.”
We brought it up? Discrimination? This is appalling on several levels.
The new Arizona law is not discrimination and does not constitute a human rights abuse. Police in virtually every free nation have the ability to enquire if someone suspected of a crime has the legal right to be in their country. The law simply gives Arizona cops that ability. The amended act specifically precludes race as a factor to initiate or support an enquiry. Furthermore, an investigation can be initiated only after “lawful contact” between police and a suspect, such as when someone is detained for breaking another law. Suspicion of an immigration violation alone is not a legal reason to initiate action. The common-sense, reasonable nature of this recently passed law is why polls show most Americans support it.
John McCain’s campaign manager Shiree Verdone and part-time deputy campaign manager Mike Hellon are both leaving their posts, the campaign confirmed to POLITICO Sunday.
Both are departing to join the state party’s 2010 “Republican Victory” fundraising operation, the McCain campaign announced Sunday. “As part of the campaign’s plan for this election year, Shiree and Mike are both transitioning over to work with party committees to create a ticket-wide Republican Victory operation,” said McCain spokesman Brian Rogers, who called that new operation “vitally important to help Republican candidates win up and down the ballot all across Arizona.”
“Sen. McCain is very grateful for all that Shiree and Mike have done to launch the re-election campaign and establish it on a firm footing and looks forward to working closely with them for Victory in November,” he said.
Rogers would not say who would be replacing Verdone and Hellon, saying only that those decisions could come over the next few weeks.
The strategy team including Rick Davis, Charlie Black, Mark Buse and Mark Salter remains in place in the same roles, Rogers said.
The move came days after McCain unveiled a new television ad stressing the importance of stronger border fence to combat illegal immigration. “Complete the danged fence,” McCain says in the ad, which features McCain walking along the border with a county sheriff.
The spot was widely mocked as a dramatic reversal from his position during the presidential campaign, when he told reporters that “walls and fences” were not part of his plan.
The campaign of his primary opponent, former Rep. J.D. Hayworth, seized on the phrase to launch a website, The Complete Danged Truth!, highlighting the incumbent’s modified positions during the primary campaign.
A Research 2000/Daily Kos poll taken May 3-5 showed McCain holding a 12-point lead over Hayworth, 48 per cent to 36 per cent.
Yesterday, Poizner and Whitman both appeared at the GOP California Gubernatorial Debate, which Poizner took the chance to expand upon attacking Whitman as an ‘Amnesty Lacky’. Needless to say, Team Poziner have tuned it into a You Tube moment. It’s also funny to see a smirking Whitman react to the allegations made by Poizner.
As much as Poziner might be viewed as bandwagon jumping onto the Arizona SB1040 passage, Poziner has been tooting the horn on border control/security for quite some time. As the topic of Illegal immigration in California comes to the forefront, it now places Poizner into a prime position. While Whitman has the job creation factor that most Californian crave, Poizner’s strong stance on Illegal immigration has now strengthened his candidacy. Poziner is surprisingly, back in vogue.
California Senate candidate Carly Fiorina voiced support Friday for Arizona’s new immigration law even as she deplored a “racist tone” that’s developed in some corners of her party over the highly charged issue.
The former Hewlett Packard CEO said the law’s passage stemmed from Washington’s failure to address the problem of illegal immigration through stricter border enforcement and a practical temporary worker program.
But when asked in an interview with POLITICO if Republicans needed to make any changes in their approach to the growing Hispanic community, Fiorina replied, “There has been a very unfortunate racist tone that has emerged in a lot of the discussion about immigration and that’s inexcusable. We must be a country that welcomes legal immigrants to this country. We must be a country that recognizes that we have industries like agriculture that have depended on temporary migrant labor for generations.”
Fiorina, who trails former Rep. Tom Campbell in polling ahead of the June 8 GOP primary, accused Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and the Obama administration of using passage of the controversial Arizona law to change the subject.
“The Democrats want to use immigration as a wedge issue for the Hispanic community. Barbara Boxer, in particular, has taken the Hispanic constituency for granted, for many, many years,” she said.
The Arizona measure, which has led to nationwide protests and boycotts, directs law enforcement to question people about their immigration status and demand to see their documents if there is reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally.
“When somebody finds 11 people in a car, four of them in the trunk and has probable cause that something is being smuggled across the border, I think it’s a reasonable question,” said Fiorina.
You would be forgiven for thinking the above image was a soviet era propaganda poster, it is however circa now Dept of Labor artwork as part of the ‘We Can Help’ campaign. So how does the Dept of Labor help exactly? Well, it certainly doesn’t hide the fact as to who it’s looking to help most.
According to the DOL press release: “..the department is renewing its emphasis on reaching and assisting workers who often find themselves denied the pay legally guaranteed to them by law. The campaign also underscores that wage and hour laws apply to all workers in the United States, regardless of immigration status“.
Welcome to the U.S Department of Day Laborers, Obama sanctioned, and protected by fluffy ‘feel good’ Political Correctness. The U.S Department of Labor may as well change the name of the ‘We Can Help’ campaign to ‘We Can Help You Vote Democrat”.
Craig Edwards
Hat tip to free_US_Citizen for letting us know about ‘We Can Help’.
This YouTube video features audio from the Solid Principles Podcast interview with Arizona U.S Senate Candidate J.D Hayworth, on the topic of Illegal Immigration. Given the recent debate over Illegal Immigration, it’s important to consider J.D Hayworth’s comments were made prior to the passage of the Arizona Immigration Law SB1070. Hear the complete J.D Hayworth interview on Solid Principles Podcast – Episode 27 – “The Maverick Stops Here”.
If you had anyone who violated a drug law, and had the person in custody in a state jail, nobody would blink if you turn them over [to federal authorities] … but immigration is treated differently for reasons that are inexplicable.
I asked the Arizona delegation years ago [if they wanted to construct a border fence] and they told me they want to have a friendly border. Now they have one. Massive numbers of criminal aliens, smuggling of people and narcotics are coming across the border.
This issue seems to be creating a divide within your own party, does that hurt Republicans?
I think you can see that, but there’s one in the Democratic Party, too. They’re now understanding that (the argument that immigrants do) jobs that Americans don’t want to do no longer washes.
Believe me, this is not a Republican-Democrat issue, although most of the open border crowd are in the Democratic Party. There are folks – especially in the work force who have lost their jobs to folks who have come here illegally – in both parties who are very concerned about this.
What do you think about the boycott of Arizona and Arizona business that’s being proposed in response to this new law?
That will not be a movement that’s embraced by the majority of Americans throughout the country.
The fact that there are left-wing groups out there who urge boycott of Arizona on the basis that they want to cooperate with the federal government on enforcement of existing laws is remarkable. If the state of Arizona said, “We’re going to hand over those with drug violations to the feds,” that would produce a yawn from other cities in the United States or an attaboy. The idea that [Arizona] said we’re going to follow the law … and that brings rebuke from some left-wing groups says more about those left-wing groups than it does about America.
What we need is not reform, it’s enforcement. The major sticking point is that we haven’t had enforcement … that’s the one action that the open border crowd refuses to embrace. The national discussion on immigration is comparable to a discussion on whether the speed limit should be 55 or 70 while we’re doing 100 and there’s no highway patrol to speak of.
I am posting another great Michael Ramirez cartoon, not to show any disrespect to Hispanics, but to make the point that it is the law breaking by some that we object to.
Here’s another email text I received today that puts the “controversial” illegal alien issue into common sense form that even a liberal ought to be able to understand.
~~John Cronin~~
- IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.
· – IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.
· - IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET………………………….
1 – A JOB,
2 – A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 – SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 – WELFARE,
5 – FOOD STAMPS,
6 – CREDIT CARDS,
7 – SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 – FREE EDUCATION,
9 – FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 – A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON ,
11 – BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE,
12 – AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney said Tuesday the new Arizona immigration law is a “direct result” of inaction by the federal government and hopes the state is careful in its implementation.
The new law allows law enforcement officers to check the citizenship of anyone in the state they suspect of being an illegal immigrant and hold a suspect until the federal government can confirm citizenship.
In a statement to POLITICO, the likely 2012 Republican presidential candidate said he understands the situation along the U.S. border with Mexico that prompted the law and hopes it encourages the federal government to act.
“Arizona’s new immigration enforcement law is the direct result of Washington’s failure to secure the border and to protect the lives and liberties of our citizens,” Romney said.
“It is my hope that the law will be implemented with care and caution not to single out individuals based upon their ethnicity,” he added. “It is increasingly clear that the time has come for Washington to fulfill its responsibility for border security.”
Romney is one of the first likely presidential contenders to speak out on the controversy.
