Alabama’s New Immigration Law

AL takes AZ's approach and goes a few steps beyond.

This week the state of Alabama passed, and Governor Bentley signed, a new immigration law modeled on the controversial SB1070 from Arizona, although the AL legislation is actually tougher (indeed, the Governor called it the nation’s toughest).

Via the AP:  Tough illegal immigration law signed by Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley

Alabama’s governor today signed a tough new illegal immigration law that requires public schools to determine students’ immigration status and makes it a crime to knowingly give an illegal immigrant a ride.

The bill also allows police to arrest anyone suspected of being an illegal immigrant if they’re stopped for any other reason. Alabama employers also are now required to use a federal system called E-Verify to determine if new workers are in the country legally.

The latter is the most problematic portion of the bill, as it gives Alabama law enforcement the right to detain any person if there is a “reasonable suspicion” that they are undocumented.  Of course, what does one think are the likely criteria for such suspicions?  I am guessing it is some combination of being brownish of hue, speaking Spanish/speaking accented English, and/or appearing to be on the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum.  I would note that one does not have to produce proof of citizenship when applying for a driver’s license.  As such, just having a driver’s license will not be sufficient to ward off the aforementioned “suspicions.”  There is also the fact that there is no legal requirement for US citizens to carry identification, and the fact that not everyone (especially poorer people) has a license.

Any law that can result in the harassment of citizens and legal residents simply because of their ethno-linguistic background should be anathema in the United States.  And let’s face facts:  the persons who tend to be in favor of these laws are highly, highly unlikely to ever be considered to be “suspicious” and therefore downplay these types of problems.

Further, the bill makes it illegal to knowingly transport an undocumented individual or to rent apartment/house to such a person.  Granted, the word “knowingly” has a lot of weight (and a difficult burden of proof for prosecutors) but what this provision likely will do is lead to discrimination in housing, as one can easily see a landlord simply not wanting to take any chances on Hispanic renters.*

Other provisions of the bill target employers and require the use of e-verify.

In regard to the claim that this is a “jobs-creation bill” (which numerous politicos have claimed) I concur with Greg Weeks:

Instead, it will be a “jobs-creation bill for American lawyers.”

Indeed.   The likelihood is quite high that this bill will spin off a great number of law suits.  Further, I suspect that there will not be a massive queue outside the chicken processing plants which have been major employers of migrant labor.  We shall see.

Indeed, as an editorial in The Daily Home rightly notes:

If the law holds up to the legal challenges already being prepared, the test will be not so much whether crime rates drop or availability of public services rises, but whether Alabamians move into the jobs once held by illegals.

Nothing in the final bill that Gov. Robert Bentley signed Thursday will have any positive effect on the state’s economy, but it could spur chicken-processing plants and hand-harvested agriculture to follow their labor force to other states.

This is on point.  Past experience has demonstrated that working in chicken processing plants, a rather unpleasant job by all accounts, has been both a key example of “jobs Americans won’t do” and, as noted above, an attraction of migrant worker to the state.  If the law stands, we will get to see an experiment in action:  either Americans will take those jobs at the same rate of pay or we will see those plants moving elsewhere.

If the plants move, then that would be an indication that, yes, there is a labor demand being served by immigrants not being served by the native population.  As such, that should suggest, as most experts do already, that what we need is significant reform to our immigration laws in a fashion that would allow demand and supply to better coincide than is the caser under current practices.

Also, on the job’s front, I can’t disagree with the editorial’s conclusion:

It does, however, reinforce Alabama’s reputation for racism and xenophobia, which could hurt business prospects in the long run.

Since the real way to produce good jobs for Alabamians is to attract more industry to the state, this is a valid and telling point.  The notion that what Alabama needs to free up jobs in chicken processing, seasonal agriculture, house framing, cleaning fast food restaurants and the like sets the bar for job creation rather on the low side, yes?

I am, in general, not a fan of the states inserting themselves into this area of policy, as it is fundamentally a federal issue.  Ultimately, this is part of two, related, factors.  One is that immigration has become an ideological issue within the GOP (and hence the proliferation of these laws across the country.  The other is the inability of the federal government to come to a comprehensive immigration reform.  The two are linked for two reasons.  The first is that the lack of the latter leads to the former.  The second is that both are driven by utterly unrealistic understandings of the immigration issue.

—–

*And as a resident of Alabama I can guarantee you that prejudice in housing is alive and well.  Even amongst my own neighbors in a middle class, and multi-race neighborhood I still hear people express concern over the race of people who might buy vacant homes.  Stereotypes and racism die hard.

FILED UNDER: Borders and Immigration, US Politics
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter

Comments

  1. Chad S says:

    They should ask Georgia about their agri jobs after passing their immigration bill.

  2. ponce says:

    Must be weird walking around Alabama knowing only 10% of the white people you see voted for the current president.

    http://blog.nola.com/news_impact/2008/11/Obama-white-vote-nov09-2008.gif

    They must see themselves besieged.

    Bills like this are to be expected from them.

  3. superdestroyer says:

    Once again a writer sums up the immigration controversy by saying that enforcing the laws is too hard and that they like cheap labor so the U.S must have open borders and unlimited immigration.

    Of course, the U.S is now a place with many neighborhoods and even some cities where it is not possible for a white person to live and the libertarian answer to to create more neighborhoods, cities, and regions that are devoid of whites while lower the standard of living of all Americans and turning the U.S. into a third world country.

    Why are so many American citizens working so hard to turn the U.S. into a third world country?

  4. Herb says:

    Dr. Taylor writes about “utterly unrealistic understandings of the immigration issue”

    Then, as if to prove it, Superdestroyer starts talking about how “the U.S must have open borders and unlimited immigration.”

    No, but how about a guest worker program?

  5. And, once again, a propenet for tougher immigration laws argues not on the brasis of economics or sensible reform, but instead on the basis of race:

    Of course, the U.S is now a place with many neighborhoods and even some cities where it is not possible for a white person to live and the libertarian answer to to create more neighborhoods, cities, and regions that are devoid of whites while lower the standard of living of all Americans and turning the U.S. into a third world country.

  6. Gustopher says:

    Well, this bit by superdestroyer is odd:

    Of course, the U.S is now a place with many neighborhoods and even some cities where it is not possible for a white person to live

    A few questions:

    1. Where are these places?
    2. Why can whites not live there?
    3. Is it that whites cannot live there, or is it that whites tend to have more economic opportunities and have the ability to not live there?

  7. Southern Hoosier says:

    The notion that what Alabama needs to free up jobs in chicken processing, seasonal agriculture, house framing, cleaning fast food restaurants and the like sets the bar for job creation rather on the low side, yes?

    No, You don’t understand what is doing on in the real world do you? Do you want more examples? I can find them.

    BOSTON — The former owners of a New Bedford factory that was the target of a giant immigration raid last year have agreed to pay $850,000 to settle claims the company underpaid its workers.

    On Aug. 25, dozens of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested approximately 595 workers in a raid on an electric transformer manufacturing facility owned by Howard Industries, Inc. in Laurel, Miss., a town of 20,000

    On Aug. 26, hundreds of people lined up outside the plant to apply for jobs as news of the raid spread. (AP, Aug. 27 .

    A factory in Scranton, PA, that produces goods for the armed forces was raided today by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

    This was the scene Wednesday at Terra Universal – a day after immigration agents served a federal criminal search warrant, shutting down the company’s computers and cutting off their shipping. And, the company attorney said, costing the company at least $150,000 in business.

  8. Southern Hoosier says:

    The notion that what Alabama needs to free up jobs in chicken processing, seasonal agriculture,

    house framing,

    cleaning fast food restaurants and the like sets the bar for job creation rather on the low side, yes?

    What’s wrong with being a framing carpenter? It is an entry level job.

    Salary: Average—$16.90 per hour

    Advancement Possibilities and Employment Outlook

    Experienced carpenters can become supervisors of crews of carpenters. Eventually, they can become general superintendents of construction sites. Some carpenters become estimators and analyze the duration and costs of materials and labor for a job. Often carpenters become contractors. Almost one-third of all carpenters own their own businesses. This percentage is higher than the average for all construction trades. Self-employed carpenters make cabinets and furniture, do repair work, and remodel houses.

    Read more: Carpenter Job Description, Career as a Carpenter, Salary, Employment – Definition and Nature of the Work, Education and Training Requirements, Getting the Job http://careers.stateuniversity.com/pages/240/Carpenter.html#ixzz1P5mOJKR4

  9. steve says:

    ” Alabama employers also are now required to use a federal system called E-Verify to determine if new workers are in the country legally.”

    I assume this means everyone will need to be able to prove they are a citizen. That will be difficult for many poorer people who do not maintain records well and on older workers who will not have birth certificates immediately available. Guess people in some states just need to learn to carry their papers with them everywhere.

    Steve

  10. superdestroyer says:

    Gustopher,

    Just find the cities or schools where there are no white children in the public schools. Places like Laredo Texas where the public schools are 99% Hispanic. A white student at a place like Nixon High school would be marked as prey. The same as South San Antonio, Brownsville, El Paso,

    What is really amazing is that politcians knowing that less than 50% of the students in public schools are non-Hispanic white that the federal government refuses to study what happens to white students in majority non-white schools. Of course, the government spent decades studying black students in majority white schools but few of those schools exist know and fewer majority white schools will exist in the future. So all of that research was pointless.

  11. superdestroyer says:

    Steven Taylor,

    The economic argument is that open borders and unlimited immigration will lower the standard of living of blue collar and middle class whites down to the level of third world immigrants without the ethnic and race based support groups and government programs that are designed to hlep non-whites in the U.S.

    Open borders and unlimited immigration is nothing more than a way for elite whites to spit in the face of blue collar and middle class whites. One would tend to believe that the elite whites in teh U.S. want all of the blue collar whites to die and be placed with third world immigrants.

  12. Southern Hoosier says:

    For example, recent immigrants tend to send $200 or $300 home on a monthly basis. Individuals who have been in the United States longer and are better off financially tend to send money less often but in larger amounts. It is estimated that worldwide remittances amount to more than $126 billion

    http://goo.gl/uGNM9
    Wouldn’t that money be better off spent in the local community rather than being sent overseas?

  13. ponce says:

    “Open borders and unlimited immigration is nothing more than a way for elite whites to spit in the face of blue collar and middle class whites.”

    Ain’t it funny how we have strict limits on the number of doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. who can immigrate?

    And even then there are licensing barriers to prevent immigrant professionals from working in their fields…

  14. Southern Hoosier says:

    steve says: Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 15:18

    ” Alabama employers also are now required to use a federal system called E-Verify to determine if new workers are in the country legally.”

    I assume this means everyone will need to be able to prove they are a citizen.

    Everyone has to have a social security number to work.

    How E-Verify Works

    When an employee is hired, he or she fills-out the first part of FORM I-9 and the employer completes the Form. The Form is the first step in verifying the employee’s identity and legal working status. The employee has to give the employer documentation that establishes his or her identity and eligibility to work in the United States.

    The employer then uses the E-Verify system: the system matches the newly hired employee’s Social Security number and other Form I-9 information with records stored by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA). Within seconds, the employer is able to confirm an employee’s eligibility to work in the U.S. and his or her name, Social Security number, date of birth, citizenship status and any other Form I-9 information.

    http://goo.gl/v4vFj

  15. The problem is that E-verify has a 15% false negative error rate (meaning that 15% of citizens attempting to verify their status come back as non-citizes). That means there are tens of millions of people who will be legally banned from getting lawful employment.

  16. superdestroyer says:

    Ponce,

    Actually the medical employment system is set up to give immigrants a huge advantage. There are more positions in residency programs than there are graduates from medical schools. The other positions are filled by physcians who are trained outside the U.S. That is why most hospitals are filled with immigrant physicians.

    Look at how immigrants has narrow the economic opprotunities for middle class whites. Whites cannot qualify for a government set aside job or contract, do not get affirmative action for college but are lumped in with Asians for college admission. On the other hand, the Hispanic immigrants qualified for 8a contracting, quotas for college, and quotas for government jobs. At the same time, jobs that used to be filled by blue collar whites such as carpenter or brick layer have become the domain of poor immigrants who receive less in pay.

    Of course, most whites in the U.S. do not come from a large extended family and tribal clan that will help them. In college, white who want to be engineers, physicians, or computer programs have to compete in college with the organized ethnic study groups and ethnic support organizations. That is why the pay of white males has been stagnant since open borders was started in the 1960s.

  17. I use E-Verify. I’m wondering if anyone else here does. You can call it free all you like, but the cost in time is non-negligible. Just another unfunded mandate, this time coming from the right.

  18. Southern Hoosier says:

    Stormy Dragon says:
    Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 16:10

    The problem is that E-verify has a 15% false negative error rate

    Debunking the “E-Verify Error Rate”

    Of the thousand, 942 are instantly verified. Instant verification of legal workers surely can’t be an error.

    Of the thousand, 942 are instantly verified. Instant verification of legal workers surely can’t be an error.

    Fifty-eight are told that they have to do something more to establish that they are lawfully authorized to work. Usually this means they have to go to Social Security to correct the mismatch in name and number.
    http://goo.gl/JUllZ

    Wouldn’t it be better to correct a SSN error now rather than wait till you retire? Of course I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the site.

  19. 58 / 1000 when expanded to the entire country is 17.4 million people.

    And the process of correcting a fault the the Social Security Administration records can take YEARS to resolve:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23378093/ns/us_news-life/t/resurrected-still-wallowing-red-tape/

  20. superdestroyer says:

    Stormy Dragon ,

    If the government is not competent to manage the borders, enforcement immigration laws, or even verify that I am a citizen, then how can anyone consider the government competent enough to run health care, a cap-and-trade program, or financial regulations.

    Why are progressive so ready to enforce every regulation against the middle and upper middle class but never try to enforcement regulation when it comes to blacks or Hispanics?

  21. Liberty60 says:

    A white student at a place like Nixon High school would be marked as prey.

    Jesus, gabacho. How did you come by this pants-wetting abject terror of Hispanic people?

    I live in Santa Ana, CA, which is majority Hispanic/ Vietnamese. I often shop in stores where I am the only white person. Our daughter goes to a school where the name “Nguyen” fills 4 pages in the yearbook.

    And so far we have been treated with nothing but kindness and civility.

    But on to the larger point- why is it that when it comes to capital and goods, we always hear a clamor to “let the Market handle it”.

    That is, we should allow capital and goods flow across borders unrestricted, and that will bring prosperity and free beer to us all. Hooray!!

    Yet when the subject is labor, suddenly everyone becomes a trade warrior, and wants to erect walls to keep out competing labor.

    Lets look at an example-
    Suppose I own a cabinet shop in Santa Ana. If I hire immigrant labor from Michoacan to build the cabinets, I am a bad guy, and a criminal.

    But if I outsource the cabinets to a factory in Michoacan and import them, I am a Galtian superhero, a savvy businessman.

    Why is one scenario good, and the other bad?

  22. Southern Hoosier says:

    Stormy Dragon says:
    Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 17:06

    58 / 1000 when expanded to the entire country is 17.4 million people.
    :

    You mean the whole country is looking for work? I knew unemployment was bad, but I didn’t think it was that bad.

  23. Southern Hoosier says:

    Liberty60 says: Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 17:48

    Lets look at an example-
    Suppose I own a cabinet shop in Santa Ana. If I hire immigrant labor from Michoacan to build the cabinets, I am a bad guy, and a criminal.

    Only if the person from Michoacan is in the country illegally.

  24. PD Shaw says:

    Prof. Taylor wants to tarnish supporters of such laws as racist, but who is hurt and who supports them? Does anybody here know why the Mayor of New Orleans declared the city “Chocolate City”? (Hint: Wikipedia won’t say)

    I’m increasingly of the view that the feds won’t take up their responsiblity, so let states keep hammering away to find out what might pass scrutiny until the feds take notice and come up with something that makes sense.

  25. Why are progressive so ready to enforce every regulation against the middle and upper middle class but never try to enforcement regulation when it comes to blacks or Hispanics?

    I don’t know. Why don’t you ask one? I prefer the government not be tasked to do either, but then I’m one of those silly people who actually believes in small government as more than a campaign slogan.

  26. @PD:

    No, I want to tarnish the specific proponent, superdestroyer above, as spouting a bunch of racist nonsense.

    What else would you call his rant?

  27. @PD:

    I will go further and note that I do think a lot of these laws are motivated by xenophobia than they are about finding a workable solution to a complex problem.

    Do I think every proponent of these laws are xenophobes and racists? No, I do not. Do I think some are? Yes, and without a doubt.

  28. Southern Hoosier says:

    I would like to point out that many of those that are being hurt be illegal immigrants are the Hispanics who are here legally. They pay their taxes. buy their insurance and registrar their cars the same as the rest of us. Then they have to go out an compete in the labor market against those that don’t have those extra expenses.

  29. They may not be explicitly racist in the sense that they, asked on the matter, would say they considered their race inherently better than others, but I think most have a negative aesthetic reaction to people not from the same cultural background as themselves which colors the way they react to proposals such as this.

  30. Then they have to go out an compete in the labor market against those that don’t have those extra expenses.

    OH NO!!! COMPETITION!!! IN A MARKET!!!! HORRORS!

  31. Southern Hoosier says:

    Stormy Dragon says:
    Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 19:01

    Then they have to go out an compete in the labor market against those that don’t have those extra expenses.

    OH NO!!! COMPETITION!!! IN A MARKET!!!! HORRORS!

    You want to punish people that come here legally, pay their taxes and abide by the law, just so you can get a cheaper Taco?

  32. PD Shaw says:

    Prof. Taylor, your implicit accusation of racism on the part of those who disagree with you was in paragraph 3; I hadn’t read any comments. But it’s a good formula for you, you might choose to stick with it.

  33. @PD:

    I think that this law will lead to racial profiling, yes. Do you deny that this is the case? That paragraph is less about the supporters than it is about the likely means of implementation. Although, I suppose, that it is something supporters ought to take into consideration before giving over their support.

  34. OzarkHillbilly (used to be tom p) says:

    Comment in violation of site policies deleted.

  35. Southern Hoosier says:

    Is that the extent of your vocabulary?

    I hope you racist pieces of sh*t are comfortable in hell.

  36. You want to punish people that come here legally, pay their taxes and abide by the law, just so you can get a cheaper Taco?

    Let me answer piece separately:

    1. No I do not want to punish people that come here legally. But I believe in free association, which means that short of violent criminals everyone who wants to come here should be able to come here.

    2. No I don’t want to punish taxpayers. Laws to get more unauthorized immigrants to pay taxes would be great. This law doesn’t appear likely to do anything about that.

    3. I don’t get the boner for authority figures most people on the right get, so I don’t really believe in obeying immoral laws purely for the sake of obeying the law.

    4. Yes, I would love a cheap taco. Thanks!

    The immigration issue is a great example of how much people on the right are “fair weather capitalists”. All the talk about limited governement, free markets, less regulation, etc. goes out the window the second they’re not the ones immediately benefit. Replace the word “immigrant” with “non-union worker” and their proposals are pretty much the same stuff they always call socialism when the labor movement proposes.

    If you can’t compete in the marketplace, the government shouldn’t be manipulating the rules to force people to go with you. And that’s the case whether you’re the UAW or FAIR

  37. superdestroyer says:

    OzarkHillbilly,

    Thank you for confirming the stereotype of a progressives: profanity, insults, snark, and no facts. Maybe you could point to the Department of Education studies that show that whites are not harmed by being in a majority Hispanic or African-American Schools. Maybe you can point to all of the college educated whites who have moved to El Paso, Brownsville, Las Silver City, Yuma, or Richmond California for all of the economic opportunities and the good schools.

    Ask yourself why progressive whites think that Burlington, Vt; Madison, Ws, or Portland, OR. They are not moving there for the diversity.

  38. superdestroyer says:

    Stormy Dragon ,

    If you want unlimited immigration and open borders, then you are going to have to eliminate all of the entitlements in the U.S. first. As your hero Milton Friedman said: you cannot have open borders and a socialist state. Are you really willing to give up social security, public schools, public universities, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance just to get cheaper tacos?

  39. Southern Hoosier says:

    Stormy Dragon says:
    Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 20:02

    You want to punish people that come here legally, pay their taxes and abide by the law, just so you can get a cheaper Taco?

    Let me answer piece separately:

    1. No I do not want to punish people that come here legally. But I believe in free association, which means that short of violent criminals everyone who wants to come here should be able to come here.

  40. Liberty60 says:

    OK, so lets try this from a different tack-
    Why do people come here illegally?

    Why don’t people from Mexico just get a visa, like the rules say?

    Answer- because our government won’t let them.

    The number of visas is not set by the marketplace like building permits- the number of visas is strictly controlled, for the specific purpose of keeping Mexican people from immigrating here.Yet the Marketplace demands what the Mexican people want to sell. So the artificial restriction on visas only serves to create a black market in labor.

    So why don’t we expand the number of visas, to accomodate what the Market demands?

  41. Southern Hoosier says:

    Stormy Dragon says: Sunday, June 12, 2011 at 20:02

    You want to punish people that come here legally, pay their taxes and abide by the law, just so you can get a cheaper Taco?

    Let me answer piece separately:

    1. No I do not want to punish people that come here legally. But I believe in free association, which means that short of violent criminals everyone who wants to come here should be able to come here.

    OK, we take in almost a million legal and almost a million illegals every year. We will have a population of almost 1/2 billion by the mid century. How many more should we take in? 5 million a year? 10 million?
    http://goo.gl/Lt7sB

  42. So just to be clear from your video link, SH, you’re arguing that the government should be given the power to set population limits based on some EPA decided definition of sustainability and criminally punish any American who violates those limits?

    Or again, are you completely jettisoning your supposed prinicilpes as long as you get to make minorities suffer in the process?

  43. steve says:

    “As your hero Milton Friedman said: you cannot have open borders and a socialist state”

    But we dont have a socialist state. Illegals come here to work. They cannot legally get Medicaid. They are able to get fake Social Security numbers, so they contribute to Social Security. The number of illegals has supposedly dropped by about 2 million with this recession and a lack of jobs.

    Steve

  44. Herb says:

    Maybe you could point to the Department of Education studies that show that whites are not harmed by being in a majority Hispanic or African-American Schools.

    What, may I ask, does any of that have to do with illegal immigration? Don’t answer. It’s rhetorical.

    Let me ask you another question, superdestroyer: would you support a guest worker program for white, English-speaking illegal immigrants?

  45. Davebo says:

    Don’t feed Superdestroyer the troll.

    Some people seem to be confused about the definition of Xenophobic thinking it means hatred for foreigners rather than the correct fear of foreigners.

    Not SuperD. They terrify him and that fear tends to dominate his internet trolling.

  46. JKB says:

    Of course, what does one think are the likely criteria for such suspicions? I am guessing it is some combination of being brownish of hue, speaking Spanish/speaking accented English, and/or appearing to be on the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum.

    This is an ignorant assertion and demonstrates a profound lack of critical thinking. None of those “criteria’ alone or in concert would meet reasonable suspicion. This is not some new phenomena. Law enforcement has been sued over many detentions and absolved, such as this Rhode Island State Trooper. There is a large body of decisions that police go by to determine what is reasonable suspicion. Is there the possibility of some Bull Conner wanna be doing something stupid. Yes. But he and his department will soon find themselves on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    And this ignores the diplomatic need to follow up if there is reasonable suspicion someone detained is a non-citizen to comply with the Vienna Convention on Consular Affairs.

  47. A voice from another precinct says:

    Dear Professor Taylor,

    Your readership is starting to scare me. Are these guys all oxygen deprived from wearing pillowcases on their heads or something?

  48. superdestroyer says:

    Herb,

    Any guest worker program is nothing more than back door amnesty and a continuation of the open door, unlimited immigration policy that the U.S. currently has.

    Also, progressives love to remind conservatives that the U.S. will soon be less than 50% non-Hispanic white. The public schools are currently less than 50% white.

    Maybe the government should be studying what happens to cities and towns when they become majority Hispanic. Maybe the government should be studying what happens to schools that are more than 50% Hispanics. At least cities like Louisville and SEattle are willing to admit that majority-minority schools are a problem. Of course, the progressive in those cities solution was to take the few remaining white students and spread them among as many schools as possible.

  49. Rob in CT says:

    Wow. Hispanic people really do scare the shit out of you. It’s sad.

  50. There is a large body of decisions that police go by to determine what is reasonable suspicion

    Indeed, a body so large and contradictory it’s hard to consider “reasonable suspicion” anything more than a joke now. He was looking at me. He wouldn’t make I contact. He was too polite. He was too rude. He was standing around. He walked away when I passed. He looked too anxious. He looked to calm. He was walking strangley. He was walking too perfectly.

    I’m sure the police will come up with a good excuse to justify each individual case, but in the end it’s still really going to be “hassle the hispanics”.

  51. Any guest worker program is nothing more than back door amnesty and a continuation of the open door, unlimited immigration policy that the U.S. currently has.

    But remember, they’re not against anti-immigrant. They’re “just” against illegal immigration.

  52. OldSouth says:

    I am, in general, not a fan of the states inserting themselves into this area of policy, as it is fundamentally a federal issue

    There is a fundamental problem with this reasoning: Our Federal government, through a combination of incompetence and sheer mendacity, has failed to control the southern border of the US. It falls to the states to protect themselves from the stupidity, and some would contend, deliberate failure to carry out sworn duties, of the Federal government.

    Congratulations to Alabama. When conditions become unhospitable for Mexican illegals (and most illegals are Mexican), the majority of illegal Mexicans will head back to their homeland.

    BTW, Alabama’s law is not nearly so draconian as Mexico’s concerning illegal immigration.

  53. matt says:

    Stormy Dragon : YEah I’ve been pulled over before for “avoiding” the police who had someone pulled over. I was in reality trying to avoid driving by them since they were partially blocking the street. I figured they’d be happy to have a civilian watching out for their safety but nope. My reward was one cop grilling me for over an hour while his buddy completely destroyed the interior of my 90 CRX (super compact two seat hatchback car that can be completely searched in well under 30 minutes). Cops seem to usually go by the heads you lose tails I win mentality..