A Practical Question About the AZ Law

[M14 Shooter]

I see. She lacks the capacity to do so. And since that's your perception, I won't bother answering your insult. Because that wasn't a question, "What's your excuse" - that was a slam.

That's OK -- I figured you'd run away as well.

You trolls. You have such an easy job.

Says she who is -also-unable/unwilling to respond to my answer to the question asked in the OP.

 

[Foxfyre]

I would like to get back to the original question of the thread.

The conflict:

Arizona has been frustrated with the federal impotence that has inundated Arizona with illegal immigrants and has further made it more difficult to deal with the increasing criminal activity and social pressures resulting from the influx of illegals. The Arizona law is intended to allow Arizona to take matters into its own hands to deal with the illegals by making federal law into state law and enforcing it as such.

The Federal government does not want states taking over responsibility for illegal immigration.

Issues of 'racial profling' and 'violation of human rights' and such are pure political window dressing in this issue.

It isn't all that much difference than the fuzzy distinctions between states wanting to decriminalize marijuana or allowing medical marijuana though marijuana remains illegal at the federal level.

It has always been that if local law enforcement arrests somebody for a federal crime, say kidnapping across state lines or international terrorism, the feds can and do step in immediately to take the person into custody.

But can the states REQUIRE the feds to do that? And if they cannot, then how does the state handle the matter unless it is allowed to apply local laws and consequences to the situation?

That seems to be the question and it is one that will have to be answered.

 

[Liability]

http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads/11-182tsacLandmarkLegalFoundation.pdf

 

[Ravi]

That might be true. But it is not relevant to the topic.

The Administration (like past Administrations) does enforce immigration laws against those who find themselves ensnared in the criminal justice system. It doesn't even always take a criminal conviction to lead to removal proceedings being started.

The topic, however, deals with more than just those aliens who have committed crimes.

UNLESS an alien is convicted of a crime (however they define "conviction" -- which is not always as you might assume), the Federal Government appears to be unwilling to deport those found to BE here illegally.

That was kind of the point of the Arizona law. A cop stops a person for valid law enforcement purposes, asks some pretty basic questions, finds out that the individual in question is HERE illegally and then proceeds to advise the Federal immigration authorities.

How exactly is that improper behavior by any State?

And again, why the fuck would the Federal Government object, much less find it desirable to oppose the AZ law in Court?

Right, because the immigration courts are clogged. So they are dropping cases to concentrate on getting rid of the criminal aliens.

The answer is not to do what Arizona did. The answer is to FUND more immigration courts and ICE employees. There is no reason at all for the FED to put their limited resources to work because Arizona legislators are xenophobic panderers.

No. That's one possible answer. But another answer is for Arizona to do EXACTLY what it did -- something about which the Federal government has no basis in logic or the law to complain.

When Arizona -- a state which has borne a harsh brunt of the illegal immigration problem -- passed the law, it was acting on behalf of its people. Perfectly valid effort. When the cops comply with that law and notify ICE of the presence of an illegal, the FEDS (oh those poor overburdened folks) COULD say "hey thanks! We'll be right over." And the Immigration Courts -- which are administered in one of the most peculiar fashions in the history of administrative entities -- COULD fix their own house and DEAL with the mess.

If we are going to continue to be a sovereign nation, we really must make some significant efforts to attend to matters of sovereignty. Immigration is one of those things. No nation which cannot manage its own borders and immigrants can survive very long AS a sovereign nation. We do have a right to limit the numbers of outsiders who are granted permission to enter. We DO have the right -- even the duty -- to manage it in our own best national interests. And we do have an obligation ot enfoce those laws and evict the trespassers.

LOL! You're a typical "small government" moron that doesn't want to increase the Federal budget to deal with a problem that gives you nightmares.

You can't get blood out of a stone and Arizona is NOT entitled to what would amount to more than their fair share of immigration attention from the Fed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I would like to get back to the original question of the thread.

The conflict:

Arizona has been frustrated with the federal impotence that has inundated Arizona with illegal immigrants and has further made it more difficult to deal with the increasing criminal activity and social pressures resulting from the influx of illegals. The Arizona law is intended to allow Arizona to take matters into its own hands to deal with the illegals by making federal law into state law and enforcing it as such.

The Federal government does not want states taking over responsibility for illegal immigration.

Issues of 'racial profling' and 'violation of human rights' and such are pure political window dressing in this issue.

It isn't all that much difference than the fuzzy distinctions between states wanting to decriminalize marijuana or allowing medical marijuana though marijuana remains illegal at the federal level.

It has always been that if local law enforcement arrests somebody for a federal crime, say kidnapping across state lines or international terrorism, the feds can and do step in immediately to take the person into custody.

But can the states REQUIRE the feds to do that? And if they cannot, then how does the state handle the matter unless it is allowed to apply local laws and consequences to the situation?

The states cannot require the Feds to do much of anything.

However, the Feds are required to enforce the laws; in this case, AZ is alerting the feds to a violation of the law, presumeably with the more-than-reasonable expectation that he feds will, well, enforce the law.

There's nothing at all wrong with that on any level - the fact that the Feds may choose to not enforce the law in noway negates the soundness of the effort to assist them in doing so.

 

[Liability]

Right, because the immigration courts are clogged. So they are dropping cases to concentrate on getting rid of the criminal aliens.

The answer is not to do what Arizona did. The answer is to FUND more immigration courts and ICE employees. There is no reason at all for the FED to put their limited resources to work because Arizona legislators are xenophobic panderers.

No. That's one possible answer. But another answer is for Arizona to do EXACTLY what it did -- something about which the Federal government has no basis in logic or the law to complain.

When Arizona -- a state which has borne a harsh brunt of the illegal immigration problem -- passed the law, it was acting on behalf of its people. Perfectly valid effort. When the cops comply with that law and notify ICE of the presence of an illegal, the FEDS (oh those poor overburdened folks) COULD say "hey thanks! We'll be right over." And the Immigration Courts -- which are administered in one of the most peculiar fashions in the history of administrative entities -- COULD fix their own house and DEAL with the mess.

If we are going to continue to be a sovereign nation, we really must make some significant efforts to attend to matters of sovereignty. Immigration is one of those things. No nation which cannot manage its own borders and immigrants can survive very long AS a sovereign nation. We do have a right to limit the numbers of outsiders who are granted permission to enter. We DO have the right -- even the duty -- to manage it in our own best national interests. And we do have an obligation ot enfoce those laws and evict the trespassers.

LOL! You're a typical "small government" moron that doesn't want to increase the Federal budget to deal with a problem that gives you nightmares.

You can't get blood out of a stone and Arizona is NOT entitled to what would amount to more than their fair share of immigration attention from the Fed.

You never fail to make a complete douche of yourself.

As soon as the argument starts not going your way, you lash out in hyper bitch mode.



Need tissue, bitch?

Arizona was ABSOLUTELY entitled to write that law and is entitled to enforce that law AS written. And that doesn't get Arizona ANY more attention than its fair share from the fucking Federal Government. What a douchey thing to say. You really are a jackass. Getting those lard-ass schmucks to DO THEIR JOB is hardly asking for more than a "fair share," stupid.

And if it requires more funding for the Immigration "Court" system to get its shit together, that is a PROPER allocation of money which I DO support, you whining ninny.

 

[chanel]

That isn't my question. My question is a logistical and practical one.

Just teasin'

I hear ya...

But I'm serious about this question. It's clear that AZ can't compel the Feds to spend dollar one.... It's clear that AZ can't determine how the Feds enforce laws; Its clear that if 50 states pass 50 different immigration laws, the Feds won't have to do anything for any of them.

so I'm not quite sure what the entire point of not striking down this nonsense would be from a purely logistal pov.

It is my understanding that they will detain suspected illegals and then inform ICE. If ICE says "let him go", I would suspect they'd have to. But of course if they have committed a serious crime (like DUI), they'd be tried just like any other criminal.

It doesn't seem like that big of a deal. Instead of prosecuting for minor offenses, they ship them home. If they decide to prosecute, they do it here. I am getting the impression that even the Supreme Court doesn't think that's unreasonable, and perhaps even a pretty damn good idea.

 

[Navy1960]

According to FBI statistics, violent crimes reported in Arizona dropped by nearly 1,500 reported incidents between 2005 and 2008. Reported property crimes also fell, from about 287,000 reported incidents to 279,000 in the same period. These decreases are accentuated by the fact that Arizona's population grew by 600,000 between 2005 and 2008.

Crime stats test rationale behind Arizona immigration law - CNN

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

Violence is not up on Arizona border despite Mexican drug war

The number of reported crimes in Phoenix and the overall crime rate continued to plummet in the first half of 2010 as the city reached 20-year lows in some categories, according to police statistics released this week.

Phoenix police also said that homicide detectives are clearing nearly 80 percent of the city's homicide investigations, the highest rate in 17 years.
Phoenix crime continues to drop in first half of 2010

The speculation we are being overrun with illegal alien crime the statistics don't match the claim. Further to understand the nature of illegal immigration here in Arizona one need understand the nature of the labor market here. First Arizona's Agriculture business has long needed and used illegal alien labor as well as the home building industry here, along with many other industries too numerous to name. While it might get one votes or gin up the base to say you don't like illegal immigration the fact remains that most of the low cost labor that Arizona has been used to for a long long time now has been immigrants coming across the border. As of 2010 there was an est 460000 illegal immigrants in Arizona and that number is dropping due to the current economic climate here.

As for SB1070 itself the law does not really matter much in terms of what it will or won't do because in the end it won't do much other than hurt the taxpayers here in the state of Arizona.

 

[Liability]

Mark Levin's Landmark Legal Foundation amicus brief made several really telling points. It is too long to get into all of it in any given post. So, for the opening course, let's consider just one point.

WHY in the fuck is the Obama Administration even bitching about the Arizona law? The Arizona law does not contradict a single solitary word of Federal Immigration Law. In FACT, Congress clearly expressed the intent that the States should be active partners in immigration enforcement concerns:

Within the INA, Congress
has declared that effective enforcement of immigration
and naturalization laws must include cooperation
between federal, state and local law enforcement
authorities. See 8 U.S.C. Section 1357(g). This cooperation
may be by way of formal partnerships or of an
informal nature. Id. (Formal agreements are provided
for in Sections 1357(g)(1)-(8); informal cooperation is
provided for in Section 1357(g)(10).)

http://www.landmarklegal.org/uploads/11-182tsacLandmarkLegalFoundation.pdf

 

[jillian]

The point, of course, is for our immigration laws to BE enforced. If this Administration wont do it. It's time to get a new Administration.

And thus, the opposition BY the administration - it doesn't WANT to enforce them, and so it acts to strike a law that would virtually force it to do so.

At the very least, the AZ law would HIGHLIGHT and underscore what the Administration is refusing to do.

given that you actually understand the question. and given that you actually know how to read a statute, how would you square that with the FACT that this administration is doing a far better job at deporting criminals than the last?

also, i'm far more interested in the actual logistics of effectuating the laws than i am in having another dialogue about immigrants.

 

[M14 Shooter]

WHY in the fuck is the Obama Administration even bitching about the Arizona law?

He doesnt want to have to explain why there's a lenghty list of illegals offered to ICE but then either released or declined. These lists will bring additional pressure to further enforce the laws, whcih He is loathe to do.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And thus, the opposition BY the administration - it doesn't WANT to enforce them, and so it acts to strike a law that would virtually force it to do so.

At the very least, the AZ law would HIGHLIGHT and underscore what the Administration is refusing to do.

given that you actually understand the question. and given that you actually know how to read a statute, how would you square that with the FACT that this administration is doing a far better job at deporting criminals than the last?

More bigoted, partisan dumbassery - but then, that's your forte, so it is expected.

The fact that deportation of convicted illegals are up in no way means that the Administration -wants- to enforce the law - instead, it is responding to public pressure to do so, and little else.

The AZ law would force the adminstration to further inncrease tha enforcement; it does not want to do so, so it opposes the law.

Really - its quite simple - so much so that I am kinda surprosed that even you haven't managed to figure it out.

Now, go finish those toilets - you missed the trash cans on the 2nd floor.

 

[Liability]

And thus, the opposition BY the administration - it doesn't WANT to enforce them, and so it acts to strike a law that would virtually force it to do so.

At the very least, the AZ law would HIGHLIGHT and underscore what the Administration is refusing to do.

given that you actually understand the question. and given that you actually know how to read a statute, how would you square that with the FACT that this administration is doing a far better job at deporting criminals than the last?

also, i'm far more interested in the actual logistics of effectuating the laws than i am in having another dialogue about immigrants.

It appears (assuming the stats aren't cooked) that this Administration is doing a better job (at least in terms of numbers) of deporting aliens convicted of crimes than prior Administrations. I assume (without knowing) that a political decision was made to the effect that "if we are going to have any credibility on the efforts to pass a Dream Act and maybe pass an Amnesty and possibly loosen up Immigration quotas, etc., then we had BEST get on with the job of kicking out aliens who have committed crimes while here."

Immigration "Courts," are really not "courts as we think of Courts. Art III Courts. They are really just extensions of the Executive Branch. The point is, when the Executive Branch head (or designee) "speaks" the administrative judges do as directed.

Again, I suspect this is the reason the Obama Administration is doing better in that department.

But that does not address why they are so hostile to attending to illegal aliens who have not committed other crimes while here. BEING here without authorization is a crime enough.

I would suggest that JUST AS the Administration can "influence" the Immigration Courts to remove aliens convicted of crimes while herE in a more efficient fashion (i.e., in greater numbers), SO TOO it should be JUST as able to effectuate kicking out those found to be here illegally -- regardless of whether they have committed any additional crimes while here.

It's a choice.

 

[Ernie S.]

According to FBI statistics, violent crimes reported in Arizona dropped by nearly 1,500 reported incidents between 2005 and 2008. Reported property crimes also fell, from about 287,000 reported incidents to 279,000 in the same period. These decreases are accentuated by the fact that Arizona's population grew by 600,000 between 2005 and 2008.

Crime stats test rationale behind Arizona immigration law - CNN

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

Violence is not up on Arizona border despite Mexican drug war

The number of reported crimes in Phoenix and the overall crime rate continued to plummet in the first half of 2010 as the city reached 20-year lows in some categories, according to police statistics released this week.

Phoenix police also said that homicide detectives are clearing nearly 80 percent of the city's homicide investigations, the highest rate in 17 years.
Phoenix crime continues to drop in first half of 2010

The speculation we are being overrun with illegal alien crime the statistics don't match the claim. Further to understand the nature of illegal immigration here in Arizona one need understand the nature of the labor market here. First Arizona's Agriculture business has long needed and used illegal alien labor as well as the home building industry here, along with many other industries too numerous to name. While it might get one votes or gin up the base to say you don't like illegal immigration the fact remains that most of the low cost labor that Arizona has been used to for a long long time now has been immigrants coming across the border. As of 2010 there was an est 460000 illegal immigrants in Arizona and that number is dropping due to the current economic climate here.

As for SB1070 itself the law does not really matter much in terms of what it will or won't do because in the end it won't do much other than hurt the taxpayers here in the state of Arizona.

How many murders, rapes armed robberies and child molestations committed by illegals will it take before you would support doing something about it?

 

[peach174]

Of the total budget the largest percentage, 31 percent, is allocated to Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In the proposed budget the agency is asking for nearly $12 billion for Customs and Border Protection, up 2 percent from the current budget; and for $5.65 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a decrease of 4 percent from the 2012 budget.
ICE budget cut 4% in 2013 DHS budget | UTSanDiego.com

With enactment of the sixth FY2011 Continuing Resolution through March 18, 2011, (H.J.Res.
48/P.L. 112-6) Congress has approved a total of $1.283 trillion for military operations, base security,
reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated
since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror
operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This estimate assumes that the current CR level continues through the
rest of the year and that agencies allocate reductions proportionately.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

The thing is SB1070 won't change the fact that spending on ICE by both Democrat and Republican Administrations when compared to what has been spent on say war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan or even perhaps the Department of Energy who's budget is 58 Billion you begin to see that from a practical standpoint, calls from Arizona Law Enforcement to ICE on suspects are not going to be much of a priority, rendering the law mute. The only other thing it will do is lend Arizona open to a whole host of lawsuits (take your pick on this one, racial profiling, wrongful arrest, etc. ) that will cost the state even more money. Just as food for thought here, Maricopa County..

His office has been the subject of thousands of lawsuits while he's been sheriff, leading to a reported $43 million in lawsuit settlements and expenses.

Joe Arpaio, Toughest Sheriff in U.S. - TIME

Now imagine if you will that number times every county, city and local here in Arizona and you begin to realize the cost of this to the taxpayers doesn't return much.

Put them in tent cities. Won't cost very much at all.

 

[Navy1960]

According to FBI statistics, violent crimes reported in Arizona dropped by nearly 1,500 reported incidents between 2005 and 2008. Reported property crimes also fell, from about 287,000 reported incidents to 279,000 in the same period. These decreases are accentuated by the fact that Arizona's population grew by 600,000 between 2005 and 2008.

Crime stats test rationale behind Arizona immigration law - CNN

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

Violence is not up on Arizona border despite Mexican drug war

The number of reported crimes in Phoenix and the overall crime rate continued to plummet in the first half of 2010 as the city reached 20-year lows in some categories, according to police statistics released this week.

Phoenix police also said that homicide detectives are clearing nearly 80 percent of the city's homicide investigations, the highest rate in 17 years.
Phoenix crime continues to drop in first half of 2010

The speculation we are being overrun with illegal alien crime the statistics don't match the claim. Further to understand the nature of illegal immigration here in Arizona one need understand the nature of the labor market here. First Arizona's Agriculture business has long needed and used illegal alien labor as well as the home building industry here, along with many other industries too numerous to name. While it might get one votes or gin up the base to say you don't like illegal immigration the fact remains that most of the low cost labor that Arizona has been used to for a long long time now has been immigrants coming across the border. As of 2010 there was an est 460000 illegal immigrants in Arizona and that number is dropping due to the current economic climate here.

As for SB1070 itself the law does not really matter much in terms of what it will or won't do because in the end it won't do much other than hurt the taxpayers here in the state of Arizona.

How many murders, rapes armed robberies and child molestations committed by illegals will it take before you would support doing something about it?

Point is this Law doesnt do anything about it! not one thing, and if we really wanted to do something about it we would put the same resrouces into the border we put into say building schools and roads into the Afghanistan rather than cutting border security or ignoring it like we have been for the last 25 years. To use crime statistics as means to justify passing a law which will not only cost Arizona a lot of money in terms of its economic health and solve nothing in terms of illegal alien activity when clearly crime has gone down across the board here in Arizona a bit off the mark. Personally I don't care if the crime is committed by an illegal alien, or citizen if we don't have the enforcement resources to take them off the streets because we are too busy fighting these needless laws in the courts we all suffer.

 

[Ernie S.]

At the very least, the AZ law would HIGHLIGHT and underscore what the Administration is refusing to do.

given that you actually understand the question. and given that you actually know how to read a statute, how would you square that with the FACT that this administration is doing a far better job at deporting criminals than the last?

More bigoted, partisan dumbassery - but then, that's your forte, so it is expected.

The fact that deportation of convicted illegals are up in no way means that the Administration -wants- to enforce the law - instead, it is responding to public pressure to do so, and little else.

The AZ law would force the adminstration to further inncrease tha enforcement; it does not want to do so, so it opposes the law.

Really - its quite simple - so much so that I am kinda surprosed that even you haven't managed to figure it out.

Now, go finish those toilets - you missed the trash cans on the 2nd floor.

Exactly! During the Bush administrations, ICE responded to those in their opposition as well. The liberal chants of racial profiling and outright racism got an appearance of complacency comparable to the results the current opposition is getting in additional deportations.

 

[Foxfyre]

According to FBI statistics, violent crimes reported in Arizona dropped by nearly 1,500 reported incidents between 2005 and 2008. Reported property crimes also fell, from about 287,000 reported incidents to 279,000 in the same period. These decreases are accentuated by the fact that Arizona's population grew by 600,000 between 2005 and 2008.

Crime stats test rationale behind Arizona immigration law - CNN

FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.

Violence is not up on Arizona border despite Mexican drug war

The number of reported crimes in Phoenix and the overall crime rate continued to plummet in the first half of 2010 as the city reached 20-year lows in some categories, according to police statistics released this week.

Phoenix police also said that homicide detectives are clearing nearly 80 percent of the city's homicide investigations, the highest rate in 17 years.
Phoenix crime continues to drop in first half of 2010

The speculation we are being overrun with illegal alien crime the statistics don't match the claim. Further to understand the nature of illegal immigration here in Arizona one need understand the nature of the labor market here. First Arizona's Agriculture business has long needed and used illegal alien labor as well as the home building industry here, along with many other industries too numerous to name. While it might get one votes or gin up the base to say you don't like illegal immigration the fact remains that most of the low cost labor that Arizona has been used to for a long long time now has been immigrants coming across the border. As of 2010 there was an est 460000 illegal immigrants in Arizona and that number is dropping due to the current economic climate here.

As for SB1070 itself the law does not really matter much in terms of what it will or won't do because in the end it won't do much other than hurt the taxpayers here in the state of Arizona.

How many murders, rapes armed robberies and child molestations committed by illegals will it take before you would support doing something about it?

That's the question. When you have social services stretched to the breaking point and even have emergency rooms and other services closing down because they cannot handle all the traffic that the government requires them to take at the people's expense, when you have a disproportionate number of illegals incarcerated in I believe all border states and a number of others, and when you can pick up your newspaper on almost any given day and see that another illegal is arrested in a bar fight or for rape or for burglary or for DUI or for driving without license or insurance, etc., what motivation is there to encourage the states or anybody to leave the illegals alone?

Admittedly the only law most illegals are breaking is by living here illegally. But if we make it unpleasant and unprofitable to be here illegally, we provide a strong invcentive for them to choose to be here legally.

As to the need for seasonal migrant labor, that has been the case for a long, long time in the border states and is easily remedied with some kind of reasonable temporary work program allowing crews to come in for the harvest or whatever and then go right back home.

 

[Navy1960]

Of the total budget the largest percentage, 31 percent, is allocated to Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In the proposed budget the agency is asking for nearly $12 billion for Customs and Border Protection, up 2 percent from the current budget; and for $5.65 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a decrease of 4 percent from the 2012 budget.
ICE budget cut 4% in 2013 DHS budget | UTSanDiego.com

With enactment of the sixth FY2011 Continuing Resolution through March 18, 2011, (H.J.Res.
48/P.L. 112-6) Congress has approved a total of $1.283 trillion for military operations, base security,
reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated
since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror
operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This estimate assumes that the current CR level continues through the
rest of the year and that agencies allocate reductions proportionately.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

The thing is SB1070 won't change the fact that spending on ICE by both Democrat and Republican Administrations when compared to what has been spent on say war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan or even perhaps the Department of Energy who's budget is 58 Billion you begin to see that from a practical standpoint, calls from Arizona Law Enforcement to ICE on suspects are not going to be much of a priority, rendering the law mute. The only other thing it will do is lend Arizona open to a whole host of lawsuits (take your pick on this one, racial profiling, wrongful arrest, etc. ) that will cost the state even more money. Just as food for thought here, Maricopa County..

His office has been the subject of thousands of lawsuits while he's been sheriff, leading to a reported $43 million in lawsuit settlements and expenses.

Joe Arpaio, Toughest Sheriff in U.S. - TIME

Now imagine if you will that number times every county, city and local here in Arizona and you begin to realize the cost of this to the taxpayers doesn't return much.

Put them in tent cities. Won't cost very much at all.

Peach , Maricopa County taxpayers have paid out over 41 Million dollars alone in lawsuits, and here is something else for you to consider..

Local police and courts around the state could face a torrent of new misdemeanor cases. If they do, it will push up county jail populations. The law carries up to a 20-day jail sentence and $100 fine.

County authorities estimate that 19 percent, or 24,700, of the 130,000 inmates booked into the jail annually are illegal immigrants, Rex said. The cost to house each inmate for 20 days is about $1,600.

If the number of illegal immigrants booked into the jail rises 10 percent and each inmate serves 20 days, it would cost taxpayers an extra $3.8 million annually

Arizona immigration law costs and savings

I would rather keep that money and use it to put more Officers on the Streets and hire more teachers and Firefighters and then have the Federal Govt. do it's job rather than passing a bill like SB-1070 which in the end does nothing but cost this state.

 

[Foxfyre]

Of the total budget the largest percentage, 31 percent, is allocated to Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In the proposed budget the agency is asking for nearly $12 billion for Customs and Border Protection, up 2 percent from the current budget; and for $5.65 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a decrease of 4 percent from the 2012 budget.
ICE budget cut 4% in 2013 DHS budget | UTSanDiego.com

With enactment of the sixth FY2011 Continuing Resolution through March 18, 2011, (H.J.Res.
48/P.L. 112-6) Congress has approved a total of $1.283 trillion for military operations, base security,
reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated
since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror
operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). This estimate assumes that the current CR level continues through the
rest of the year and that agencies allocate reductions proportionately.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

The thing is SB1070 won't change the fact that spending on ICE by both Democrat and Republican Administrations when compared to what has been spent on say war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan or even perhaps the Department of Energy who's budget is 58 Billion you begin to see that from a practical standpoint, calls from Arizona Law Enforcement to ICE on suspects are not going to be much of a priority, rendering the law mute. The only other thing it will do is lend Arizona open to a whole host of lawsuits (take your pick on this one, racial profiling, wrongful arrest, etc. ) that will cost the state even more money. Just as food for thought here, Maricopa County..

His office has been the subject of thousands of lawsuits while he's been sheriff, leading to a reported $43 million in lawsuit settlements and expenses.

Joe Arpaio, Toughest Sheriff in U.S. - TIME

Now imagine if you will that number times every county, city and local here in Arizona and you begin to realize the cost of this to the taxpayers doesn't return much.

Put them in tent cities. Won't cost very much at all.

Peach , Maricopa County taxpayers have paid out over 41 Million dollars alone in lawsuits, and here is something else for you to consider..

Local police and courts around the state could face a torrent of new misdemeanor cases. If they do, it will push up county jail populations. The law carries up to a 20-day jail sentence and $100 fine.

County authorities estimate that 19 percent, or 24,700, of the 130,000 inmates booked into the jail annually are illegal immigrants, Rex said. The cost to house each inmate for 20 days is about $1,600.

If the number of illegal immigrants booked into the jail rises 10 percent and each inmate serves 20 days, it would cost taxpayers an extra $3.8 million annually

Arizona immigration law costs and savings

I would rather keep that money and use it to put more Officers on the Streets and hire more teachers and Firefighters and then have the Federal Govt. do it's job rather than passing a bill like SB-1070 which in the end does nothing but cost this state.

Well be careful what you wish for. The road to hell is paved with the notion that if the problem is difficult or politically incorrect to deal with, we just won't deal with it.