Arizona Boycotts Could Hit Hispanic Hospitality Workers

The raft of boycotts being imposed on Arizona over its immigration law could up end hitting Hispanic workers as hard as anyone.

Hispanics make up a huge chunk of the state’s hospitality and service sector workforce — and with city governments and organizations pulling the plug on travel and conventions in Arizona, state officials point out that Hispanic workers stand to lose.

They say it makes little sense for officials protesting the Arizona law out of concern that it would subject Hispanic immigrants to racial profiling to register their dismay by targeting the tourism industry.

“These boycotts could be hurting the very same people that they profess to be helping,” said Garrick Taylor, spokesman for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Mexican president Felipe Calderón Put on Defensive at CNN

Top Official Says Feds May Not Process Illegals Referred From Arizona

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.

States Gearing Up to Follow Arizona’s Lead on Immigration

While Arizona faces the scorn of the White House and local governments across the country for its immigration law, lawmakers in several states are looking to follow the Grand Canyon State’s lead.

Lawmakers and politicians in Texas, Rhode Island, Utah and Georgia are among those who, in the month since Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the law, have announced plans to introduce similar legislation.

The officials say states need to take matters into their own hands to tackle illegal immigration and in turn reduce the taxpayer cost associated with large undocumented populations in their hospitals, schools and prisons. They draw inspiration directly from the Arizona law, bucking the trend of local and state officials who have protested Arizona and called for boycotts against the state.

Drug-Crazed Mexican Pirates Terrorize Texas Boaters

With machine-guns in hand, Mexico’s deadliest cartel is patrolling the waters of a Texas border lake.

These pirates have already ambushed three, possibly four boats, operating with virtual impunity as they make off with cash and electronics.

It’s happening on Falcon Lake in Zapata, 200 yards from the Mexican border.

Source:Pirates terrorize boaters on Texas lake

Read the Arizona Immigration Law Here

Calderon Gets Standing Ovation From Dems for Criticizing AZ Immigration Crackdown

Gov. Brewer: ‘Mr. President, Secretary Napolitano – Do Your Job!’

Many criticisms of the Arizona immigration measure can be found in the federal law

Rhode Island Democrat Wants Arizona-Like Law

Read the Arizona Immigration Law Here

Mexico’s President Slams Arizona Law, Urges Congress to Pass Immigration Overhaul

Mexico’s Harsh Treatment of Illegals – Still Think Arizona’s Law Is So Bad? It’s Not.

Mexico to use biochip to control illegal immigration

Mexico Doing Enough to Stop Illegal Immigration?

Calderon Criticism of Arizona Law Overlooks Mexico’s Tough Immigration Policy

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has been ripping into Arizona’s immigration law as he tours Washington — while appearing to disregard the way his own country cracks down on immigrants along Mexico’s southern border.

Mexico repeatedly has been cited by human rights groups for abusing or turning a blind eye to the abuse of migrants from Central America. Until recently, Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense — anyone arrested for the violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. Mexican lawmakers changed that in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but their law still reads an awful lot like Arizona’s.

Arizona’s policy, which Calderon derided on Wednesday as “discriminatory,” requires law enforcement to try to determine the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant — provided they are already in contact with that person. They can’t randomly stop people and demand papers and the law prohibits racial profiling.

The Mexican law also states that law enforcement officials are “required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues.”

Calderon, who plans to address members of Congress Thursday morning, was facing criticism on Capitol Hill for his remarks Wednesday ahead of the State Dinner at the White House.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, called Calderon’s comments inappropriate.

“It’s a little bit like inviting a guest over for dinner and then having them criticize the food,” he told Fox News. Smith wrote Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday to complain that Mexican officials have “crossed the line and are interfering in the internal affairs of the United States.”

Calderon said Wednesday that his country would retain its “firm rejection” of a policy where “people that work and provide things to this nation will be treated as criminals.”

The comments came just weeks after Amnesty International issued a report claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico — typically from Central America — face abuse, rape and kidnappings, and that Mexican police do little to stop it. When illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico, officials were known to seek bribes from suspects to keep them out of jail.

President Obama joined Calderon in criticizing the Arizona policy on Wednesday. He is trying to build support for a comprehensive federal immigration overhaul.

Please Read More Here…

Senators Press for National Guard Troops on Border

Tom McClintock responds to President Calderon

A law Arizona can live with

Written By: George Will

“Misguided and irresponsible” is how Arizona’s new law pertaining to illegal immigration is characterized by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She represents San Francisco, which calls itself a “sanctuary city,” an exercise in exhibitionism that means it will be essentially uncooperative regarding enforcement of immigration laws. Yet as many states go to court to challenge the constitutionality of the federal mandate to buy health insurance, scandalized liberals invoke 19th-century specters of “nullification” and “interposition,” anarchy and disunion. Strange.

It is passing strange for federal officials, including the president, to accuse Arizona of irresponsibility while the federal government is refusing to fulfill its responsibility to control the nation’s borders. Such control is an essential attribute of national sovereignty. America is the only developed nation that has a 2,000-mile border with a developing nation, and the government’s refusal to control that border is why there are an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants in Arizona and why the nation, sensibly insisting on first things first, resists “comprehensive” immigration reform.

Arizona’s law makes what is already a federal offense — being in the country illegally — a state offense. Some critics seem not to understand Arizona’s right to assert concurrent jurisdiction. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund attacks Gov. Jan Brewer’s character and motives, saying she “caved to the radical fringe.” This poses a semantic puzzle: Can the large majority of Arizonans who support the law be a “fringe” of their state?

Popularity makes no law invulnerable to invalidation. Americans accept judicial supervision of their democracy — judicial review of popular but possibly unconstitutional statutes — because they know that if the Constitution is truly to constitute the nation, it must trump some majority preferences. The Constitution, the Supreme Court has said, puts certain things “beyond the reach of majorities.”

But Arizona’s statute is not presumptively unconstitutional merely because it says that police officers are required to try to make “a reasonable attempt” to determine the status of a person “where reasonable suspicion exists” that the person is here illegally. The fact that the meaning of “reasonable” will not be obvious in many contexts does not make the law obviously too vague to stand. The Bill of Rights — the Fourth Amendment — proscribes “unreasonable searches and seizures.” What “reasonable” means in practice is still being refined by case law — as is that amendment’s stipulation that no warrants shall be issued “but upon probable cause.” There has also been careful case-by-case refinement of the familiar and indispensable concept of “reasonable suspicion.”

Brewer says, “We must enforce the law evenly, and without regard to skin color, accent or social status.” Because the nation thinks as Brewer does, airport passenger screeners wand Norwegian grandmothers. This is an acceptable, even admirable, homage to the virtue of “evenness” as we seek to deter violence by a few, mostly Middle Eastern, young men.

Some critics say Arizona’s law is unconstitutional because the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of “equal protection of the laws” prevents the government from taking action on the basis of race. Liberals, however, cannot comfortably make this argument because they support racial set-asides in government contracting, racial preferences in college admissions, racial gerrymandering of legislative districts and other aspects of a racial spoils system. Although liberals are appalled by racial profiling, some seem to think vocational profiling (police officers are insensitive incompetents) is merely intellectual efficiency, as is state profiling (Arizonans are xenophobic).

Probably 30 percent of Arizona’s residents are Hispanic. Arizona police officers, like officers everywhere, have enough to do without being required to seek arrests by violating settled law with random stops of people who speak Spanish. In the practice of the complex and demanding craft of policing, good officers — the vast majority — routinely make nuanced judgments about when there is probable cause for acting on reasonable suspicions of illegality.

Arizona’s law might give the nation information about whether judicious enforcement discourages illegality. If so, it is a worthwhile experiment in federalism.

Non-Hispanic Arizonans of all sorts live congenially with all sorts of persons of Hispanic descent. These include some whose ancestors got to Arizona before statehood — some even before it was a territory. They were in America before most Americans’ ancestors arrived. Arizonans should not be judged disdainfully and from a distance by people whose closest contacts with Hispanics are with fine men and women who trim their lawns and put plates in front of them at restaurants, not with illegal immigrants passing through their back yards at 3 a.m.

Please Read More Here…

Reid: GOP is “anti-immigrant party” for blocking reform

Is America Conquered When the American Flag Is ‘Offensive’?

President Obama, No One in Arizona is Laughing

LA Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the US

Hispanic Students Knock US Flag to the Ground

Read the Arizona Immigration Law Here