With all of the misinformation in the press about the new Arizona immigration law, I have included a link to the new law and some selective quotes and commentary about that law.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/16/AzSB1070.pdf

As with most new legislation, the intent of the Arizona statute is spelled out in the initial paragraph:

“The legislature finds that there is a compelling interest in the cooperative enforcement of federal immigration laws throughout all of Arizona.  The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local government agencies in Arizona.  The provisions of this act are intended to work together to discourage and deter the unlawful entry and presence of aliens and economic activity by persons unlawfully present in the United States.”

Could anybody disagree with the fact that we have an illegal alien problem?  Well apparently MSNBC does:

“For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.  The person’s immigration status shall be verified with the federal government pursuant to 8 United States Code section 1373(c).”

“The law requires police to check with federal authorities on a person’s immigration status, if officers have stopped that person for some legitimate reason and come to suspect that he or she might be in the U.S. illegally.  What fewer people have noticed is the phrase ‘lawful contact,’ which defines what must be going on before police even think about checking immigration status. ‘That means the officer is already engaged in some detention of an individual because he’s violated some other law,’ says Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri Kansas City Law School professor who helped draft the measure. As far as ‘reasonable suspicion’ is concerned, there is a great deal of case law dealing with the idea, but in immigration matters, it means a combination of circumstances that, taken together, cause the officer to suspect lawbreaking. It’s not race – Arizona’s new law specifically says race and ethnicity cannot be the sole factors in determining a reasonable suspicion.”

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Byron-York/A-carefully-crafted-immigration-law-in-Arizona-92136104.html

Finally, the new law imposes criminal and/or civil sanctions for specific activities:

“It is unlawful for a person who is unlawfully present in the United States and who is an unauthorized alien to knowingly apply for work, solicit work in a public place or perform work as an employee or independent contractor in this state.”

“An employer shall not knowingly employ an unauthorized alien.”

Sanctions leaved at both the employee and employer attack the problem at both ends.  Clearly given the high unemployment rates for American citizens, this provision should be a viewed as a welcomed sight.

While no law is perfect and some problems will arise, it is imperative that this problem take center stage and that steps be taken to enforce our federal immigration laws.  If Washington remains paralyzed over this issue, then each state will be forced to examine their situation and implement similar sound legislative fixes.  Do we really want 50 individualized statutes covering immigration?