Uproar over new Alabama immigration law

[Sofiyya 1,687]

This law is clearly testing those waters. I could easily see the court system ruling that collecting data on the status of students creates a reasonable deterrent for illegal parents to enroll their children. I hope these laws walk the line of being legal, but I do not have much faith.

I don't see that deterrent being created because it's the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution that prevents them from being singled out for intimidation or exclusion by school administrators.

[Pooky 3,825]

Do they? Should they?

IE. If I'm walking down the street I suppose an ICE official can stop me in California under stop and identify. So I give my name and address. Am I required to verify my status?

If they ask - yes.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

If they ask - yes.

Of course your not required to answer if they ask, and they would let you move on generally. Generally ICE knows better than to operate like that, they acquire warrants for places of business, operate at borders, and approved checkpoints.

[Pooky 3,825]

Of course your not required to answer if they ask, and they would let you move on generally. Generally ICE knows better than to operate like that, they acquire warrants for places of business, operate at borders, and approved checkpoints.

Look again at the law. ICE can ask for proof of legal residence. And failure, or refusal, to provide will get you in serious trouble with the Federal authorities.

The "uproar" over the Arizona law was that it allowed non-Federal law enforcement agencies to do the same.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Look again at the law. ICE can ask for proof of legal residence. And failure, or refusal, to provide will get you in serious trouble with the Federal authorities.

The "uproar" over the Arizona law was that it allowed non-Federal law enforcement agencies to do the same.

How about you post the law, because I can't find anything on the ICE site other than processing of criminals etc. or workplace related.

I would post some things supporting my position from the ACLU but most people in this forum think the ACLU is the destroyer of america...making it a waste of time.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Sousuke

[Pooky 3,825]

How about you post the law?

How about you look for it, as you asked the question.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

How about you look for it, as you asked the question.

Now your just playing a game, one I won't play. I was being nice about my questions, no need to be snarky.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Sousuke

[Pooky 3,825]

Now your just playing a game, one I won't play. I was being nice about my questions, no need to be snarky.

I'm playing no games, nor am I being snarky. Every time I've asked someone to produce evidence in the past 2 months, they've come back with the same reply "You have Google - use it." It's always the same protagonists, too. To be honest, I'm tired of it. If I'm putting in new information that's not been done over countless times before, then I'm more than willing to do the legwork.

But for something like this, which has been talked about ad nauseum, discussions of which you have been a part on more than one occasion relating to this very point, I'm done. You were the one who wanted to know. If you doubt what I have posted, you go find something that disproves it.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I'm playing no games, nor am I being snarky. Every time I've asked someone to produce evidence in the past 2 months, they've come back with the same reply "You have Google - use it." It's always the same protagonists, too. To be honest, I'm tired of it. If I'm putting in new information that's not been done over countless times before, then I'm more than willing to do the legwork.

But for something like this, which has been talked about ad nauseum, discussions of which you have been a part on more than one occasion relating to this very point, I'm done. You were the one who wanted to know. If you doubt what I have posted, you go find something that disproves it.

A bit like the Cretan paradox, I cannot show a law that does not exist in order to disprove that the law exists.

There is no law that says failure to give ICE proof of residency on a public street equals breaking a law.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

With the obvious exception, that they have a warrant or deportation order for the person walking down the street.

[Pooky 3,825]

There is no law that says failure to give ICE proof of residency on a public street equals breaking a law.

Then tell me why it is a legal requirement of all Green Card holders to carry the card at all times in public?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Then tell me why it is a legal requirement of all Green Card holders to carry the card at all times in public?

To prove they are legal a resident. Does the requirement elaborate when they must show it?

Edited June 13, 2011 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

To prove they are legal a resident. Does the requirement elaborate when they must show it?

Actually in the new immigrant book, it does say you must show it if asked by an immigration officer.

Of course this still doesn't address the issue for a USC.

Edited June 13, 2011 by Sousuke

[ScottThuy 140]

I don't see that deterrent being created because it's the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution that prevents them from being singled out for intimidation or exclusion by school administrators.

how does someone here illegally get US constitutional protections? wouldnt they be protected by the rules of their home government?

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

how does someone here illegally get US constitutional protections? wouldnt they be protected by the rules of their home government?

The constitution provides equal protection for all on US soil.