The illegal immigrant lobby is in full throttle against State laws that inhibit illegal immigration. The Immigration Policy Center has another screed in support of illegal immigration and, as usual, filled with lies, half-truths and statements designed to mislead rather than enlighten.
The first lie, or half-truth designed to deceive is the immigration is a federal responsiblity:
In the order enjoining various provisions of SB1070, the court stated that “Congress has created and refined a complex and detailed statutory framework regulatingimmigration.” Instead of simply mirroring federal law, the judge found that SB1070“will divert resources from the federal government’s other responsibilities and priorities.”
Of course, like the crooked Clinton appointee, the IPC conflates the law as passed by Congress with the Obama Regime's decision that it does not want to enforce immigration laws. All the babbling by John Morton does not and cannot supplant the laws of the United States as constitutionally enacted with a "policy" of the executive to selectively enforce the immigration laws of the United States.
Their second lie is the usual race-baiting Reverend Sharpton Shuffle:
In particular, critics fear that persons who are Hispanic or dark‐skinned, who have accents, or otherwise appear "different" are more likely to face racial profiling given thedemographics of illegal immigration.
Of course, they do not mention that the use of race in the enforcement of SB1070 is specifically prohibited. Therefore they lie by omission and heap calumny on the good men of Arizona law enforcement.
The next set of lies is quite interesting as on the preceeding page the IPC actually gets the law correct:
First, the law as it is:
Thus, even if local police arrest every undocumented person in the state, it is still up to the federal government to ultimately charge them, put them in immigration proceedings, and if necessary, deport them.
Then, on the next page, the big lie:
Under the civil immigration system, most people are entitled to appear before an immigration judge before they are officially determined to be here illegally and in the process they have the right to challenge that determination, apply for relief from removal (such as asylum), and have their day in court. SB1070‐type laws circumvent that process, potentially punishing people for being here illegally based solely on the determination of a state law enforcement officer or a federal agency before a full determination has been made.
Apparently the eggheads at the IPC don't know what is being written in their publicity releases from page to page. As they themselves say, Arizona can only arrest and present to the federal government illegal aliens. It is up to the federal government to take action to remove those illegal aliens. But arresting too many illegal aliens is not what the Obama Regime wants. They want as many illegal aliens in the U.S. to vote Democrat or through welfare use, provide cushy government jobs to Democrat welfare workers.
The next lie is again a mere repetition of the lies in the Clinton judges deeply flawed opinion:
Legal residents will certainly be swept up by [the provision requiring that you carry your papers], particularly when the impacts of the provisions pressuring law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration laws are considered. Certain categories of people with transitional status and foreign visitors from countries that are part of the Visa Waiver Program will not have readily available documentation of their authorization to remain in the United States, thus potentially subjecting them to arrest or detention.
In fact, no legally present alien can be affected. Legal permanent residents and non-immigrant aliens are required to carry with them at all times evidence of their status. LPRs carry their Form I-551 Permanent Resident Card, non-immigrants carry their passports with Form I-94, Form I-766 Employment Authorization Card, and those aliens admitted on the Visa Waiver Program have an admission stamp placed in their passport, which, again, they are required to carry with them at all times.
They further opine that determining status is so very difficult:
Determining whether or not someone is in the country unlawfully is not as simple as checking a database.
No, not quite. All lawfully present aliens have an electronic record of their admission to the United States, either as immigrants or non-immigrants, just as all aliens have physical evidence of their lawful presence. It is for the most part just that simple.
Interestingly enough, the IPC seems to sense a problem with illegal immigration and calmly suggests that local law enforcement can take care of the problem by contacting Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Furthermore, the police have always had the ability to contact ICE and inquire about an arrestee’s immigration status, and many prisons and jails have an ICE presence so that immigrants can be identified and placed into removal proceedings.
Which seems to contradict their position that arresting illegal aliens is bad:
In fact, laws like SB1070 could make communities less safe because immigrants—legal and undocumented—will be fearful of reporting crimes to the police or coming forward as victims or witnesses.
And, again, the IPC apparently hasn't read SB1070 which requires inquiry into the status of those arrested, not witnesses or victims.
But, of course, the purpose of SB1070 was to force local agencies to contact ICE when an illegal alien is detained for a crime.
So, the IPC is upset that SB1070 and other State laws are requiring local agencies to contact ICE, even though the IPC says the laws are not necessary because agencies can always contact ICE if they suspect a detainee is an illegal alien.
What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.