Gov. Jan Brewer/Capitol Media Services
“If you have the law on your side, you argue the law. If you have the truth on your side, you argue the truth. If you have neither, bang on the table with your fist, loudly and with as much conviction as possible.” — Law school adage (possibly originated with Mark Twain)
Some tables got banged around Tuesday at the state Capitol, as Gov. Jan Brewer and several Republican legislative leaders sought to score political points against Arizona municipalities who are standing up to a law that appears to have been adopted in violation of the state constitution this summer. Brewer’s argument boils down to, “The only reason to oppose this legislation is to keep the doors open to illegal immigration.” It’s a completely unfair insinuation, but my guess is it will resonate with a large number of Arizonans anyway.
The law in question seeks to expand on a voter-approved initiative from 2004 intended to remove incentives for illegal immigrants to stay in Arizona, by cutting off their access to government services and put them at risk of being reported to federal immigration agents. Sponsors of the initiative have said they wanted it to apply to every level of government under Arizona’s control. But the practical effect of state Attorney General Terry Goddard’s legal interpretation (which basically has been held up by the courts) has allowed cities and counties to largely ignore it.
Sen. Russell Pearce, R-Mesa, has been trying for the past five years to get the 2004 mandate applied specifically to local governments. He finally succeeded during a special session called by Brewer to finish adopting this year’s budget.
Arizona municipalities aren’t supportive of illegal immigration. They know their residents are deeply upset about it, and they recognize it creates a long-term drain on their tax resources. But fighting illegal immigration costs money, too, and municipalities don’t want to be forced to become immigration agents.
For one example, Congress required in 2006 that all states check the immigration status of everyone applying for Medicaid, under the belief that billions of tax dollars were buying health care for illegal immigrants who shouldn’t be eligible for such assistance. But follow-up research showed that states spent far more in creating methods to verify immigration status than they saved by turning away illegal immigrants.
The new law also allows anyone to sue a local government if he or she believes they aren’t doing enough to verify immigration status. Cities worry that will lead to hundreds of additional frivolous lawsuits from people who are absolutely certain that illegal immigrants are getting services — but don’t have any valid evidence to show the court. That hasn’t happened at the state level under the 2004 initiative, so this concern probably is overblown.
Still, Brewer’s call for the special session was quite specific, and it’s going to be difficult for the state to prove that the immigration-check mandate for local governments would have any direct effect on this year’s state budget. That’s why the cities are suing and not, as Pearce said Tuesday, because they want to “side with lawbreakers over law keepers.”
Twitter
cities need to be held responsible for knowingly giving TAX DOLLAR AID to illegals. PERIOD!!!! All the state is doing is ensuring it doesn’t happen. Don’t like the law, then don’t BREAK it.
Yet another unfunded State Legislative mandate to local government. What programs does the Legislative braintrust envision local governments cutting in order to comply with this mandate…Police officers, Firefighters, Street repair, Garbage collection, Street lighting? Please Mr. and Mrs. Legislator…do tell us.
Pearce is, unfortunately, half right. What he said is true, vice-versa. The legislature broke the law. The governor is siding with the lawbreakers over the law keepers, in this case the cities. Nowhere is a legislature given carte blanche to break the law. What azmesa says is true, and our legislators apparently have to be taught it. “Don’t like the law, then don’t BREAK it.” Our legislature apparently doesn’t agree with azmesa.
“But fighting illegal immigration costs money, too, and municipalities don’t want to be forced to become immigration agents.” — If you don’t try to fix the problem, it just gets worse. Before, there was only a few million to deal with. Now it’s more like 12 million. If we do nothing, it will only get worse. Pay now, save later. Time to clean up the mess…
LOL…DON’TCHA JUST LOVE THE ULTRA-LEFT, SOCIALIST EAST VALLEY TRIBUNE. OUR MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN ARE DYING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN TO PROTECT “THEIR” BORDERS AGAINST “ILLEGAL ALIENS” AND THE EAST VALLEY TRIBUNE IS SIDING WITH THE “SANCTUARY CITIES” WHO WANT THE CHEAP, UNDER THE TABLE PAID MEXICAN “ILLEGAL ALIENS’ WHO WORK IN THE HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS.
READING “OPINIONS” LIKE THIS MAKE ANY “PAYTRIOTIC” AMERICAN WANT TO VOMIT.
OH WELL….THE “REAL” ARIZONA AMERICANS ONLY HAVE TO READ THIS OBAMA/PELOSI/REID INSPIRED “GLOBAL, NO BORDERS” FLUSH “AMERICA” DONW THE TOILET FILTH FOR ONE MORE MONTH…….LMAO….ROTF
P.S……………….THAT “PULL-IT-SIR” PRIZE SURE WILL LOOK GOOD ON CERTAIN REPORTER’S “UN-EMPLOYMENT” APPLICATION…….LOL
What is notable here is how quickly the “what don’t you understand about illegal” crowd is willing to abandon the law for their own point of view. Apparently what we have here are two groups of people, on opposite sides of the fence who have decided the law cannot solve the problem and apparently agree that the law should be broken in order to be compatible with their view of the matter. Either the law cannot solve the problem, or neither side is to be trusted and needs to be marginalized rather quickly. “what doesn’t Russell Pearce understand about illegal?” Apparently a great deal, and that doesn’t exactly add to his credibility, does it?
Rick Russell wrote: “the “what don’t you understand about illegal” crowd is willing to abandon the law for their own point of view.” Which/what law(s) are you referring too? Do you really think ILLEGAL ALIENS only break one law (crossing the border ILLEGALLY)? I guess that stealing id’s, applying for aid, et al isn’t illegal? Many participate in “human” smuggling, a felony. Many have crossed the border more than once, which is a felony by Federal standards.
I have no problem treating them like a human being, but I will not give them the same rights as an AMERICAN citizen. Go into Mexico illegally, I dare you….
roguemaster666
Off topic and typical. This has to do with illegal immigration only as an issue that is addressed in a so-called law passed illegally. The legality is the topic, not immigration. And you are, apparently willing to accept illegal because you agree with it. Thus you, Mr. Pearce and illegal immigrants are essentially the same, breaking the law for your own ideas. If that is what you are willing to do, then, for the rest of us, there is no difference between you. They break the law, so do you, if they should pay a penalty, so should you. Mr. Pearce should simply lose his office, as this act obviously means he has no respect for the law, and we can’t allow that breach to continue. Isn’t that what your argument against “illegal immigration” is?
C’mon Le, this is just another one of those unfunded mandates you guys are so keen on criticizing government for, especially a problem that doesn’t exist. You say yourself it costs more to administer it than it generates in savings and there’s really no hard evidence that the problem is anything more than anecdotal in the first place. As for Pearce, the real issue here is keeping citizen minor children from getting benefits they’re entitled to during a severe recession by making them responsible for the sins of their parents.
Happy Freakin’ Thanksgiving.
This is just pre-election fear mongering that is “popular” because the news media refuses to spell out the facts of immigration in this country because it’s afraid it will adversely affect their bottom line. In the meantime, hate and fear and scapegoating continue to rear their ugly heads.
HEY…I HAVE AN IDEA….IF THESE MEXICAN ILLEGALS ALIENS WANT TO COME INTO AMERICA ILLEGALLY….THEN WHEN THEY GET CAUGHT WE SHOULD PUT THEM IN US ARMY UNIFORMS (THEY CAN WEAR THE MEXICAN FLAG ON THEIR SHOULDERS) AND SEND THEIR “ILLEGAL BEHINDS” TO AFGHANISTAN AND GIVE THEM SOME GUNS, FOOD AND WATER AND PUT THEM UP IN THOSE HILL TOP COMBAT OPERATING BASES AND LET THEM “EARN” THEIR CITIZENSHIP…A YEAR’S DEPLOYMENT WILL GIVE THEM AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP.
IF OUR “BORN IN THE USA” SOLDIERS CAN FIGHT FOR THEIR COUNTRY….THEN WHY NOT LET THESE “MEXICAN ILLEGAL ALIENS”…EARN…THEIR CITIZENSHIP ????????????????