Two quick things about SB 1070
April 23, 2010
First of all, sorry I’ve been away for a while. If you didn’t notice, I tried to avoid political discussion during Lent. Since then, I have been completing my dissertation and trying to get a job. (I just got back from a campus visit at Wabash College; wish me fortune.)
But I had come back, however briefly, for this. Upon reading about the recent “law” passed in Arizona, here are two quick remarks:
- A practical question: What does a potential illegal immigrant look like exactly? The answer seems to spell out what is wrong with this so-called “law.” Which bring me to…
- This is not a “law.” It makes no “legal” demands on human action. As Augustine put it: “An unjust law is no law at all.”
Now the work ahead will be to carefully explore what this means and is more carefully. If we find its effects to be unjust, then, we must reject it and obey the true law of justice.
Advertisement
7 Comments
Comments are closed.
On its face, it seems like all the law does is specify enforcing what is already supposed to be enforced. It does highlight an inconsistency, though.
If a police radio call near the border area goes out on a shooting or a robbery, the cops have to quickly screen their surroundings and go after a likely lead. They don’t starting looking around for oriental women or old people; they look for young, hispanic males. But a cop who then finds the criminal would be foolish to write such a thing in his report. In fact, he must take great efforts to come up with some other (almost any other) reason why he picked the guy up.
We emplace strange policies that keep ourselves from using common sense about acknowledgin the fact that such crimes are overwhelmingly committed by young, hispanic males. These policies actually encourage cops to make stuff up instead of admitting that they use common sense.
So this law seems to be an uncomfortable call to common sense.
Is this not similar to Adm. Mullen pointing out the military’s inconsistency with DADT? I mean, we currently have a policy which defies common sense, but there are a great number of people who are more comfortable denying it than about highlighting it and correcting it.
what does the word LAW mean to you? what does sovereign nation with borders mean to you? would you be able to go to other countries and live illegally? where do you draw the line? our state of California is bankrupt and we are paying millions of dollars to illegals who are on welfare. does having compassion for others mean laws are to be ignored? it is time to fix of a major problem in this country!!!!!!!!!!
Sam:
“What does a potential illegal immigrant look like exactly?” I’d say somebody looking for a job, Catholic, with a Spanish or Portuguese surname,… looks illegal to me.
Best of luck to you in Crawfordsville, and a good thing for you it isn’t in Arizona!
our state of California is bankrupt and we are paying millions of dollars to illegals who are on welfare
As far as I can tell, there are no illegal immigrants who are themselves on welfare. Welfare can go to the children of illegal immigrants, because if they were born in the United States, they are citizens. There have been moves to deny welfare and even education to children who are citizens because their parents are illegal immigrants. I don’t understand why children who are citizens should be punished because of their parents.
Bruce: I agree about profiling in the thin sense. But when the crime is being an illegal immigrant, then, the profiling gets thicker. The suspects are always looming, instead of looking for a specific set of features—that include a car color, type of shirt, and tattoos.
Marie: What are the requisites of sovereignty? The US borders do have a history and a colorful one at that. And, yes, if compassion “violates” the so called “law,” then a higher law—the love command—is the one to be followed. And, by the way, most “illegals” pay more taxes than anyone else with their earning totals and their children get benefits, not them.
Frank: Exactly. Thanks.
With any luck, this ludicrous piece of legislation will be overturned by the state supreme court, or, failing that, the U.S. Supreme Court.
Profiling is just a reflection of reality. The reason certain people are suspected over others is because the statistics support that probability. If we want to change that we need to change the numbers. If there were more oriental illegal immigrants in Arizona than Hispanic, then the profiling would be different. Is this stuff too advanced for you people? Or are you just too blind to see how you do the same thing every day? Oh, you don’t think that you do profiling? What do you think about me? Would you that I am liberal or conservative? Democrat or Republican? You have probably already made up your mind by reading this note. That is called profiling. Welcome to the world.