Monday, May 10, 2010
Immigration vs Constitutional Rights
If once, America was founded upon immigrants, and the Constitution established the protection of their basic civil rights, then how is the Constitution being violated today by the state giving too much power to police over the immigration issue in the state of Arizona?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The 10th Amendment to the Constitution states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution… are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.” The question of the Constitution being violated by the States giving too much power to the police is answered in this one Amendment, I believe. Whether or not this bill is morally right or wrong is for another discussion and another day, but I do believe that the opposition of this bill is making it sound much worse than it is. The police do not have the power to stop someone they suspect unless upon “reasonable suspicion”, they cannot however stop someone because they are of a different ethnicity than Caucasian, or stop people by random selection and ask for identification which is where I think this bill is skewed by the opposition. (I.E. in a routine traffic stop, the police find that someone cannot provide identification whether through a driver’s license or state ID they will then have the authority under reasonable suspicion to detain a person until proper paperwork can be shown.)
ReplyDeleteThe state of Arizona has a deficit of around 3 billion dollars, and they must do some things to decrease their deficit in order to be a State that can prosper through our tough economic times. By making sure people immigrate into our nation properly we can ensure that we are supporting citizens of our country, which is what the Constitution was created to do. I believe that the state of Arizona has every right by definition of the Constitution to enforce this immigration bill if they believe it is something that will benefit their state and hopefully in turn our entire country.