Yesterday we had a video-enhanced brief look at Arizona's illegal immigration enforcement law, and I mentioned that there are other locales with very similar provisions and directives to their law enforcement team that had not received nearly as much notoriety.
In fact, it seems there has been a county in Virginia with a similar law for the last three years. Perhaps a look at their law and the resulting turmoil might shed some light on the discussion.
Officers now question all criminal suspects about their immigration status once an arrest is made.
In 2008, the University of Virginia conducted a survey to see what effects, if any, the Prince William County law had. It concluded initial fears about racial profiling did not happen.
That's one win.
It also show [sic] that schools saw a drop in English as a second language enrollment..
Two for two.
... There was also a drop in uninsured mothers giving birth...
Three for three.
... and [a drop in] individuals turned over to immigration and customs enforcement.
A perfect day at the plate. Reductions in uninsured care and balkanization in schools, and a lighter workload for the ICE, all without racial profiling. I'm sorry, but it's hard to imagine there's much of a downside to such adherence to federal law. Admittedly Arizona has a much bigger job to do due to it's proximity to the primary source of illegal immigration, but doesn't it seem that such a law backed up by proper border security and control might see similar success?
One gets the feeling that perhaps the primary goal of the opponents is not to protect minority groups from racist officers of the law, but rather to court the votes of those same minority groups. /sarc
5/22/10 1400: Ah, but it seems that there are those tasked with the responsibility of enforcing the law who will refuse to do so, when it comes at the expense of political advantage.
A top Department of Homeland Security official reportedly said his agency will not necessarily process illegal immigrants referred to them by Arizona authorities.
John Morton, assistant secretary of homeland security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, made the comment during a meeting on Wednesday with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune, the newspaper reports.
"I don't think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution," Morton told the newspaper.
This isn't your decision to make, Mr. Morton. Just do your job. I don't really care whether you like the law, or whether you believe such laws will help to solve the problem. You are free to have your opinion about comprehensive immigration reform, and I'm free to have mine. But your job, and the job of your department, calls for you to follow the law, and to selectively and unilaterally penalize Arizona, thereby making it okay to be here illegally in one particular state but not in others. If you disagree so strongly with the enforcement provisions of immigration law then do yourself and the department a favor and resign. This would at least show that you believe strongly in what you say.
