Immigration Reform

gangrene · April 28, 2010

Texas lawmaker to introduce anti-immigration bill similar to Arizona law

As someone who has personally navigated the US immigration waters, I feel I have an above-average understanding of immigration policy - US laws, as well as those of many other countries. At the same time, I realize the majority of Americans are ignorant on the subject and attain much of their knowledge on US immigration policy from Hollywood romantic-comedy movies. (No, foreign nationals don't simply obtain US citizenship immediately upon marriage to a US citizen.) It's not easy to get a tourist visa, much less an immigrant visa, for citizens of most countries outside of Europe - those included in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP). For that reason, my daughter barely knows her maternal grandmother, aunts, uncles and cousins. But, I also don't believe we should allow anyone in the world who wants to come to the US to simply enter undocumented and in unlimited numbers - we'd quickly be overwhelmed.

So, from my perspective, simply ignoring the illegal immigration problem on our southern border is not fair to the citizens of other countries who'd like to come to the US, but have no other choice but to do it lawfully. As much as I try, I simply can not fathom why the US federal government is so lenient when it comes to enforcing the immigration laws on our southern border and in our southern states. (Take my word, they are certainly not as lenient when processing paperwork at the US embassies/consulates abroad.) I know of all the common excuses - separating families, working the jobs that typical Americans won't work, afraid of losing votes, etc, etc. However, none of those excuses hold any merit with me.

As far as I can tell, the "new (state) law" in Arizona is nothing more than enforcing the federal laws in which enforcement has been neglected by the federal government. And, "showing immigration papers" (as every news source is reporting) can be as simple as showing your state-issued driver's license, because all but nine US states now verify lawful US presence before issuing identification cards/driver's licenses. Even though the Arizona law is not yet in effect (and may never be if the White House administration gets involved), it is already making those unlawfully present in Arizona scatter, just as Oklahoma's 2007 bill did. And, you can rest assured, many of those will make their way to Texas. I am, obviously, happy that similar legislation is being proposed in Texas and will support it.

MeanGreenTexan · April 28, 2010

I think the fear is that the law could be used as a side door for racial profiling. I don't know of anything else wrong with this law.

UNT90 · April 28, 2010

I think the fear is that the law could be used as a side door for racial profiling. I don't know of anything else wrong with this law.

The law requires police to have reasonable suspicion in order to be able to ask for citizenship documents, which in Arizona is an Arizona drivers license or state ID card.

This is the same standard that police need to detain anyone for any reason, so the fear of racial profiling is unfounded. I'm sure there are those that will say that police will use this offense as a reason to stop hispanics, but that is bad logic. Police could use any offense to stop a hispanic (which, by the way, if they are committing that offense, is not racial profiling), so why focus on one law out of about a 1000?

The challenge in the courts will be whether or not a state can enforce federal immigration laws.

hickoryhouse · April 28, 2010

immigration is a touchy issue for me, I have a situation personally where I deal with the subject on a regular basis and believe me it is no fun. I don't have objections with this law as long as it doesn't require you to carry anything other than you ID, which you should already have on you...

The real answer to ilegal immigrationis not in ID checks, border patrols, fence building or over excited militia guys patrolling the border. There are two things that need to happen to really even begin to effectively address the issue of illegal immigration:

First we need to enforce laws that are on the books and implement the punitive effects that have been written with them. ID checks are a great idea, the racial profiling is definitely a concern but this legislation is at least a start.

Second, and most importantly, we need to make it easier to come here legally! People that get here legally often spend 6-12 months going through the various different types of paperwork and approvals needed to even apply for a work / student visa. Once they apply there are separate hoops to jump through to aquire the desired visa and these can take several more months as well. If you successfully complete the first steps and do aquire your visa often times they give you only paperwork saying that you are approved but as you arrive in the country, or if you extend your visa or if you get a new passport from home the visa stamped in your passport goes way and that is needed for everything that you do while you are here. Lets say that you are from the Czech Republic and you are here as a student. Odds are you don't go home very often and if you happen to no longer have the stamp you can't. Immigration and customs do not have to let you back into the country even if you have the proper paperwork. It takes months to even prepare for the trip with the government and even after all that prep you are still not guaranteed to get back in the country. The complexity of the situation is difficult at best to describe, and living through it makes it seem even more complex the trying to sell the Texas Rangers.

My point being that if we want real immigration reform then we need to reform and streamline the process for the people that want to be here legally and enforce the laws that we already have to keep those that don't wish to participate out. The entire immigration system here is nuts.

KRAM1 · April 28, 2010

immigration is a touchy issue for me, I have a situation personally where I deal with the subject on a regular basis and believe me it is no fun. I don't have objections with this law as long as it doesn't require you to carry anything other than you ID, which you should already have on you...

The real answer to ilegal immigrationis not in ID checks, border patrols, fence building or over excited militia guys patrolling the border. There are two things that need to happen to really even begin to effectively address the issue of illegal immigration:

First we need to enforce laws that are on the books and implement the punitive effects that have been written with them. ID checks are a great idea, the racial profiling is definitely a concern but this legislation is at least a start.

Second, and most importantly, we need to make it easier to come here legally! People that get here legally often spend 6-12 months going through the various different types of paperwork and approvals needed to even apply for a work / student visa. Once they apply there are separate hoops to jump through to aquire the desired visa and these can take several more months as well. If you successfully complete the first steps and do aquire your visa often times they give you only paperwork saying that you are approved but as you arrive in the country, or if you extend your visa or if you get a new passport from home the visa stamped in your passport goes way and that is needed for everything that you do while you are here. Lets say that you are from the Czech Republic and you are here as a student. Odds are you don't go home very often and if you happen to no longer have the stamp you can't. Immigration and customs do not have to let you back into the country even if you have the proper paperwork. It takes months to even prepare for the trip with the government and even after all that prep you are still not guaranteed to get back in the country. The complexity of the situation is difficult at best to describe, and living through it makes it seem even more complex the trying to sell the Texas Rangers.

My point being that if we want real immigration reform then we need to reform and streamline the process for the people that want to be here legally and enforce the laws that we already have to keep those that don't wish to participate out. The entire immigration system here is nuts.

Well said, sir...I'll give you a +1 for that response!

eulesseagle · April 28, 2010

gangrene & hickory house....well said +1.

the democrats have always built their base around new immigrants, illegal and otherwise as well as other diverse groups. just take a look who tradionlly votes for them. of course they want illegals naturalized for a greater hold on power. do you not think that approximately 20 million new voters would enhance their power?

gangrene · April 28, 2010

immigration is a touchy issue for me, I have a situation personally where I deal with the subject on a regular basis and believe me it is no fun. I don't have objections with this law as long as it doesn't require you to carry anything other than you ID, which you should already have on you...

The real answer to ilegal immigrationis not in ID checks, border patrols, fence building or over excited militia guys patrolling the border. There are two things that need to happen to really even begin to effectively address the issue of illegal immigration:

First we need to enforce laws that are on the books and implement the punitive effects that have been written with them. ID checks are a great idea, the racial profiling is definitely a concern but this legislation is at least a start.

Second, and most importantly, we need to make it easier to come here legally! People that get here legally often spend 6-12 months going through the various different types of paperwork and approvals needed to even apply for a work / student visa. Once they apply there are separate hoops to jump through to aquire the desired visa and these can take several more months as well. If you successfully complete the first steps and do aquire your visa often times they give you only paperwork saying that you are approved but as you arrive in the country, or if you extend your visa or if you get a new passport from home the visa stamped in your passport goes way and that is needed for everything that you do while you are here. Lets say that you are from the Czech Republic and you are here as a student. Odds are you don't go home very often and if you happen to no longer have the stamp you can't. Immigration and customs do not have to let you back into the country even if you have the proper paperwork. It takes months to even prepare for the trip with the government and even after all that prep you are still not guaranteed to get back in the country. The complexity of the situation is difficult at best to describe, and living through it makes it seem even more complex the trying to sell the Texas Rangers.

My point being that if we want real immigration reform then we need to reform and streamline the process for the people that want to be here legally and enforce the laws that we already have to keep those that don't wish to participate out. The entire immigration system here is nuts.

Thanks for the input. It sounds like your experiences have been similar to mine and I, too, consider the immigration subject to be a sensitive and personal one. I find it VERY difficult to just sit on my hands and say nothing when people complain that illegal immigrants aren't hurting anyone and should be granted amnesty simply because they "contribute to our society". It totally baffles me how the INS can be so strict and by-the-book when legally admitting immigrants to the US but the federal government does nothing about those who refuse to abide by the laws and unlawfully reside and work within the US. Many of those who enter illegally do so because they just don't want to pay the fees and wait the 6-12 months (or longer in many cases) to do it legally or have already been refused visas - none of which is a justifiable reason for illegal entry.

I agree that the real solution is much more complex than beefed-up security, ID checks or more fences that will just be circumvented. But, I think the real problem centers around ignorance of the current laws. The average American knows zip about the immigration process and, therefore, sees no problem with granting amnesty to all those here illegally. And the media works the emotional angle by doing stories on families who are "ripped apart" by ICE when illegally-present parents are deported, placing all the blame on ICE rather than the parents who chose to put their children in the situation. The problem with making it easier to come here (and I don't necessarily disagree with that) is that 3/4 of the world wants to come here. Making it easier to get a tourist visa, or even a temporary work visa, will solve nothing without better accountability and a fool-proof system for tracking people here on those visas. Illegal status is not solely achieved by illegal entry. Many of those who currently reside in the US illegally followed the laws and came here legally - they just didn't go home when they were lawfully required to do so. Yes, the entire immigration process is very confusing, and almost as intimidating as the IRS tax code, but I think the best place to start is to educate the public by communicating the basic requirements for legal immigration, why those requirements exist and why illegal immigration should not and will not be tolerated. Aside from being much more lenient and unenforced, our immigration policies are not that different from most other countries. But, instead of educating themselves on the subject, everyone wants to claim racial discrimination and civil rights abuse because those accusations are what make our government cower.

Get ready for this topic of immigration to really heat up with all the planned protests/demonstrations we'll witness this weekend (including Dallas). Hopefully, we won't see the same refried-bean vandalism the Arizona capitol recently experienced or any of the "reconquista movement" that was/is present in California at past May day marches.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 28, 2010

gangrene,

Agreed. My wife is from Mexico and came here legally. And, it isn't easy to come here or stay here legally - even if you are married to a U.S. citizen.

Sometimes when her brothers come to visit, they can't bring all of their families because getting the visa paperwork renewed is tedious and precise. And, that's the way it should be.

I've got a real problem with people who think a "pathway to citizenship" should be opened to those who came here illegally. Is the government trying to find a way to sell a cars cheaper to auto thieves? If I trespass, does the government try to find a way to give me part of the land I trespass upon?

When people are here illegally, they are here illegally. I don't want to put the cart before the horse for anyone here but illegal mean "not legal." Stop me if I'm going too fast.

The idea behind the visa is that only people who have jobs and can support themselves in Mexico (or whatever country) can apply for and receive the visa. The assumption is that if they are already making a living in the homeland, they aren't going to try to stay here illegally.

And, that makes sense. If another country - insert Mexico here - has an economic/unemployment problems, we should not be the default safety valve to get them out of that government's hair.

Arizona's new law aside, the problem always has been - and continues to be - that our stupid government doesn't apply the law already on the books! Why not? If I steal, rape, or murder, they would apply the law to me, and with great measure.

So, why not just enforce the laws against people here illegally? It's so damn simple that it's maddening. And, it's costly to States to have to take care of these people while the federal government sits back in Washington, D.C. not giving a crap in most cases and getting in the way of actually enforcing immigration law in others.

It is not fair to people like my wife who played by the rules to get here either. I understand the economic situation in Mexico isn't great. But, it's way, way past time for the Mexican government to take care of its own house.

But, look at it. It's so corrupt and incompetent that druglords rule whole swaths of the country in the northern parts of the country, and they are making inroads into traditional tourist territories.

Mexico needs to privatize many of its industrial sectors - mainly in the areas of energy and technology - and allow it's citizenry to have a shot a developing a true middle class.

Everything else is bullsh*t. The American hispanics who foment protest against common sense immigration law are the worst. They are true traitors in every sense of the word. This country gives them more opportunities than they can ever know and all they can do is spit on it. And, spit on those, like my wife, who followed the rules to get here.

I know things will get worse before they get better in this endeavor, but I'm all for what Arizona and other Mexican border states do to protect the economic and safety interests of their citizens.

The Fake Lonnie Finch · April 28, 2010

The law requires police to have reasonable suspicion in order to be able to ask for citizenship documents, which in Arizona is an Arizona drivers license or state ID card.

This is the same standard that police need to detain anyone for any reason, so the fear of racial profiling is unfounded.

Exactly, dude. I've been given traffic tickets throughout my life by white cops, black cops, women cops, etc. (let's just say that in my youth, I had kind of a heavy foot out on the highway). And there was one common denominator to every encounter - each cop asked me for I.D. and insurance, some for registration as well.

Were they racially profiling me? I'm white as sack of biscuit flour. There's a hulking, big black highway patrol cop who used to work the turnpike between Oklahoma City and Tulsa while I was in law school. He stopped me once and I know I saw him with others pulled over at least a dozen times. Never once did I think the black cop had pulled me over because I was white. Nor did I think twice about him asking me for my I.D. or insurance - it's the law!

Same here. Within a few weeks of moving to Frisco, a lady Frisco cop pulled me over on Main Street just under the tollway. And, I'll be dadgummed if she didn't ask me for license and registration as well. Was she profiling me as a white male? Doubtful. She was doing her job in protecting the rest of Frisco from my speeding.

The law is the law. You've got to have a license to drive. You've got to have proof of financial responsibility/insurance. These laws aren't meant to harass you,but to protect third parties who you might injure or whose property you might damage.

If someone is in this country illegally, I want them off the streets. I want them gone. If they aren't playing by the rules and injure someone, the injured party has no recourse. And, I can tell you as a raving stark mad property and casualty insurance professional there is far too much of these types of incidents today.

Applaud Arizona for stepping up to protect it's citizens.

THOR · April 29, 2010

i love the new law and hope that texas, as well as other states, follow suit. if you don't belong here, you shouldn't be allowed to be here. i love how rush limbaugh read off his laws or something like that for immigration and it was actually mexicos laws. they are damn harsh and i wish are's were as harsh...and for the record, i'm not a limbaugh dude...i don't even understand what it means to be "left" or "right"!

these are "his" laws:

“All right, immigration proposals under discussion. Let me add mine to the mix. I want to call this proposal the Limbaugh Laws. …First, if you immigrate to the United States of America, you must speak the native language. You have to be a professional or an investor. [America is] not going to take unskilled workers…There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools, no special ballots for elections, no government business will be conducted in your native language. Foreigners will not have the right to vote…nor will they ever be allowed to hold political office. According to the Limbaugh Laws, if you're in our country, you cannot be a burden to taxpayers. You are not entitled, ever, to welfare, to food stamps, or other government goodies. You can come if you invest here, but it must be an amount equal to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage. If you don't know have that amount of money, you can't come and invest. You have to stay home. If you do come and you want to buy land, okay, but we're going to restrict your options. You will not be allowed to buy waterfront property in the United States. That will be reserved for citizens naturally born in this country.”

“In fact, as a foreigner, you must relinquish individual rights to property… Another thing. You don't have the right to protest when you come here. You're allowed no demonstrations, you cannot wave a foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our president or his policies, or you get sent home. You're a foreigner. You shut your mouth or you get out, and if you come here illegally, you go straight to jail and we're going to hunt you down 'til we find you.”

“I can imagine many of you think that the Limbaugh Laws are pretty harsh. I imagine today some of you probably are going, "Yeah! Yeah!" Well, let me tell you this, folks. Every one of the laws I just mentioned are actual laws of Mexico, today. I just read you Mexican immigration law. That's how the Mexican government handles immigrants to their country.”

UNT90 · April 29, 2010

http://www.masslive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/national-41/1272505019259580.xml&storylist=new_topstories

It looks like the law is already working.

gangrene · April 29, 2010

http://www.masslive....=new_topstories

It looks like the law is already working.

From the above article: Standing near potted trees and bushes for sale at a Home Depot in east Phoenix, Diaz, 35, says he may follow three families in his neighborhood who moved to New Mexico because of the law. He says a friend is finding plenty of work in Dallas.

untbowler · April 29, 2010

I say we give Mexican Illegal Immigrants the same courtesy that the Mexican Constitution gives to illegal immigrants in their country and we can see who is being more fair and understanding. Ask the Salvadorians, Guatemalans what they think of their neighbor to the North.

Of course this is not a Black, Brown, or White issue it is the issue of our Federal Gov't not doing their job, as for the all the boycotts of AZ, bring it on, who cares if San Franpsycho boycotts, but when an AZ legislator or elected official does it, they should be immediately recalled and booted out of office.

hickoryhouse · April 29, 2010

The US has different immigration laws for every contry on the planet, until recently even members of the EU such as the Czech Republic were not allowed to come to the states, even on vacation, without that several month long visa process while their neighbors to the north Germany only have to have a passport. The US still has incredibly standoffish relations with several Eastern European countries even though the communist regimes that used to govern there lost power more than 20 years ago. Immigration is not just a Mexico / America issue. It is a global one. If we determine that there are certain types of immigrants that we want (not meaning races) such as students, workers etc. then we should make the laws reflect that regardless of origin.

Censored by Laurie · April 29, 2010

The law requires police to have reasonable suspicion in order to be able to ask for citizenship documents, which in Arizona is an Arizona drivers license or state ID card.

This is the same standard that police need to detain anyone for any reason, so the fear of racial profiling is unfounded. I'm sure there are those that will say that police will use this offense as a reason to stop hispanics, but that is bad logic. Police could use any offense to stop a hispanic (which, by the way, if they are committing that offense, is not racial profiling), so why focus on one law out of about a 1000?

The challenge in the courts will be whether or not a state can enforce federal immigration laws.

So what would be considered "reasonable suspicion" in this situation?

MeanGreenTexan · April 29, 2010

So what would be considered "reasonable suspicion" in this situation?

Therein lies the problem.

I suppose you would also have to ask this of pretty much anyone with an accent(regardless of color)? I'm a honky so I'll be left alone. The issue is evident. If you're here illegally, you're here ILLEGALLY. You need to leave and wait your turn to come here.

But, what happens when an officer asks a citizen for id but they are hispanic? Will that municipality look forward to lawsuits based on racial profiling?

Censored by Laurie · April 29, 2010

Therein lies the problem.
I suppose you would also have to ask this of pretty much anyone with an accent(regardless of color)? I'm a honky so I'll be left alone. The issue is evident. If you're here illegally, you're here ILLEGALLY. You need to leave and wait your turn to come here.
But, what happens when an officer asks a citizen for id but they are hispanic? Will that municipality look forward to lawsuits based on racial profiling?

On the plus side, we may've found a new job for Mike Bacsik.

Quoner · April 29, 2010

On the plus side, we may've found a new job for Mike Bacsik.

If Bacsik had just wondered aloud how Spurs fans would be able to travel and see their team play the Suns without legal hassle, it would have been savvy political commentary.

UNT90 · April 30, 2010

So what would be considered "reasonable suspicion" in this situation?

The same for any other offense. Police need probable cause to arrest and reasonable suspicion to detain.

Courts have defined reasonable suspicion as:

"this type of police encounter is constitutionally permissible only when an officer can articulate a particularized, objective, and reasonable basis for believing that criminal activity may be afoot or that a given suspect may be armed and dangerous."

Here is the long standing Supreme Court case that controls this type of encounter:

http://lawbrain.com/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio

This is defined in many different ways by the Supreme Court. For example, lets say an officer is patroling a high crime area, he turns the corner, and sees a guy look at him and immediately turn and run. The Supreme Court has ruled that if you can articulate that this is a high crime area (backed up with stats), you have reasonable suspicion to chase and detain this fleeing dude. I picked this example (Illinios v Wardlow: http://sol.lp.findlaw.com/1999/wardlow.html) because it was a 5-4 decision that will probably be overturned if the balance of the court changes.

For this offense, I would imagine it would normally come as a result of police contact for something else (like a traffic stop). Say the cop stops the guy, the guy has no ID, can't speak english, and can provide no contact number for anyone who can provide any type of ID for this guy. This would give the officer reasonable suspicion to detain the guy longer than the amount of time for the traffic stop to determine if he was an illegal alien. If he developed probable cause after the detention (no ID at all, no social security number, an admission by the guy stopped, etc...), the arrest occurs.

This really isnt that big of a deal. If the Feds had done their job, the state would not be left in the position to defend itself.

After a little research, I don't think there is any legal weakness in this law. It may get struck down by the 9th Curcuit (because they rarely pay any attention to the law or the constitution), but this may be a 9-0 or 8-1 Supreme Court Decision in favor of the State of Arizona.

Short enough for you?

UNT90 · April 30, 2010

Therein lies the problem.
I suppose you would also have to ask this of pretty much anyone with an accent(regardless of color)? I'm a honky so I'll be left alone. The issue is evident. If you're here illegally, you're here ILLEGALLY. You need to leave and wait your turn to come here.
But, what happens when an officer asks a citizen for id but they are hispanic? Will that municipality look forward to lawsuits based on racial profiling?

Look, this will be enforced very similiar to how No Insurance is enforced. You don't see cops pulling over people just to see if they have insurance, and you won't see cops stopping hispanics just to see if they are legal.

The one exception is the drivers license and insurance checkpoints ran by a lot of states (not so much here). These may also be able to be legally used to determine citizenship. But these are ran by checking everybody, or every third car, or some other objective standard.

All hispanics will not be targeted.

Let's also not forget that there are illegals from other countries that are not hispanic.

Edited April 30, 2010 by UNT90

UNT90 · April 30, 2010

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ap_on_en_mu/cb_puerto_rico_ricky_martin

What a moron. I guess he doesn't know that Puerto Ricans are AMERICAN CITIZENS.

Idiot.

Quoner · April 30, 2010

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100430/ap_on_en_mu/cb_puerto_rico_ricky_martin

What a moron. I guess he doesn't know that Puerto Ricans are AMERICAN CITIZENS.

Idiot.

I agree that Ricky Martin's viewpoint shouldn't be news (but at least he was speaking at a music industry event that was already being covered), but there's maybe a little bit of irony for calling him out for offering his opinion within a message board thread of (as far as I can tell) all white guys offering their opinions.

I haven't actually made up my mind on what I think about this law yet, but I don't see a promising way to remove profiling and other backlash once it moves from theory to implementation.

UNT90 · April 30, 2010

I agree that Ricky Martin's viewpoint shouldn't be news (but at least he was speaking at a music industry event that was already being covered), but there's maybe a little bit of irony for calling him out for offering his opinion within a message board thread of (as far as I can tell) all white guys offering their opinions.

I haven't actually made up my mind on what I think about this law yet, but I don't see a promising way to remove profiling and other backlash once it moves from theory to implementation.

Actually, I thought it was insulting to the people of Peurto Rico that Martin assumed that they would all be in favor of illegal immigration.

If you want to point out racism, maybe you should start there.

People really dont understand the definition of racial profiling. If they did, they would know that this law in no way would increase the possiblity of racial profiling.

Edited April 30, 2010 by UNT90

MeanGreenTexan · April 30, 2010

People really dont understand the definition of racial profiling. If they did, they would know that this law in no way would increase the possiblity of racial profiling.

OK. You can count me as one of those who do not know what racial profiling is then. Can you clarify?

Here's a hypothetical situation... lets work from this:

A hispanic male is pulled over for speeding in Arizona. He speaks broken english, but is a U.S. Citizen. Should the officer ask him for documentation of residency other than a drivers license (which could be counterfeit)? If so, and it is provided, then what? I believe the citizen can challenge the municipality in court, correct?

Is that not racial profiling?

In the same situation, 99.9% of the time, white/black folks will not be asked for this info.

UNT90 · April 30, 2010

OK. You can count me as one of those who do not know what racial profiling is then. Can you clarify?
Here's a hypothetical situation... lets work from this:

A hispanic male is pulled over for speeding in Arizona. He speaks broken english, but is a U.S. Citizen. Should the officer ask him for documentation of residency other than a drivers license (which could be counterfeit)? If so, and it is provided, then what? I believe the citizen can challenge the municipality in court, correct?
Is that not racial profiling?
In the same situation, 99.9% of the time, white/black folks will not be asked for this info.

This is not racial profiling.

Racial profiling is detaining someone for the sole reason that they are black, hispanic, white,, asian, etc..

That's right. The only reason for the detainment is race.

In your above example, there is a speeding violation, which gives the officer probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, therefore more than enough reason to stop the vehicle. In Arizona, proof of American citizenship is required before you are issued an Arizona driver's, therefore producing an Arizona driver's license is producing proof of citizenship.

If you really want the supreme court's definition of racial profiling, read this: http://aclu.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=573

It basically says that it does not matter what the officer's subjective reason for stopping a vehicle/person is, as long as there is an objective violation of the law.

Arizona is 3 for 3 with the 9th circuit upholding previous immigration laws in the past several years.