Arizonians has put themselves in quite of a pickle with a bill that has passed, and they are in for some more headaches as well. The bill itself is quite controversial; that goes without saying. What makes this bill especially heated, is how both sides of the argument have valid points, but fail to see how the opposition sees it. Typical of most political discussions, but I find this one more unique
Pro-bill arguments:
Arizona has been swamped with illegal immigrants for years. Some of the more unnoticed news stories have been cities and public works (hospitals specifically) going bankrupt from the thousands of illegals that use services, but lack to finances to pay the state back. Most commonly is a person coming through the desert who needs medical attention, is given it, but has no money to pay back these services through insurance.
Besides this, the federal government has done little to help the influx of illegal immigration, so states have no choice left but to take action themselves.
Anti-bill arguments:
regardless of the problem, a dangerous legal precedent is set with the passage of this bill. Having the right to detain people based on their legal status allows law enforcement to racially profile. Also there are previsions in this bill that allow for certain areas of education and how it is taught to be scrutinized as well. The Federal government has not been responding to this problem because it is sticky-er than some people see it. Some of these illegals have children now in the US, so how should the deportation go? Allowing a rogue state to go out and pass legislation like this is borderline unconstitutional and will most likely be challenged in appellate court
My opinion?
A hybrid of both points to be exact. The federal government has been lacking on a response which has pushed states like Arizona to react this way. However, creating a precedent like this is tricky in our court system and is not right. But what exactly *is* being done about this problem?
A sticky situation indeed....
Besides this, the federal government has done little to help the influx of illegal immigration, so states have no choice left but to take action themselves.
Anti-bill arguments:
regardless of the problem, a dangerous legal precedent is set with the passage of this bill. Having the right to detain people based on their legal status allows law enforcement to racially profile. Also there are previsions in this bill that allow for certain areas of education and how it is taught to be scrutinized as well. The Federal government has not been responding to this problem because it is sticky-er than some people see it. Some of these illegals have children now in the US, so how should the deportation go? Allowing a rogue state to go out and pass legislation like this is borderline unconstitutional and will most likely be challenged in appellate court
My opinion?
A hybrid of both points to be exact. The federal government has been lacking on a response which has pushed states like Arizona to react this way. However, creating a precedent like this is tricky in our court system and is not right. But what exactly *is* being done about this problem?
A sticky situation indeed....
No comments:
Post a Comment