Much has been written and said about the new Arizona Law pertaining to immigrants (it pertains to everyone actually, and certainly is not limited to undocumented immigrants). From Eugene Robinson and Richard Cohen at the Washington Post, to John Stewart on The Daily Show, and even Tom Tancredo, everyone is up in arms about this law. We have heard from Megan McCain (John McCain’s daughter), President Obama, and even from Governor Jan “Show Me Your Papers” Brewer, all opine about the law and WHY the Arizona Legislature had to act on “illegal” immigration.
One of my favorite movie lines is from “The Princess Bride.” Vizzini, the mastermind behind the kidnapping of Princess Buttercup, upon seeing the Man in Black pursuing them keeps repeating the word “inconceivable.” Finally, Inigo Montoya, one of of Vizzini’s then assistants says: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
This program . . . “discusses a recent court decision affirming that local law enforcement officers may question suspected illegal aliens encounter [sic] about their immigration status and then contact immigration authorities (ICE). Known as Estrada v. Rhode Island, this important decision should reassure local officers that they are not obligated to look the other way when they discover immigration law violations and provide guidance on reasonable actions officers may take in questioning foreign nationals.”
In the totality of the circumstances, we cannot say that a reasonable officer in Officer Chabot’s position would have understood that his conduct violated Tamup’s constitutional right.
Yesterday the USCIS released its FY 2009 immigrant visa numbers. More than a million people legally immigrated to the United States in FY 2009. Almost 60% of those folks did so through the adjustment of status process, meaning they were already in the U.S. when their place in line was reached. While not disclosed by USCIS, the supposition is that a number of those folks were actually out of status or, even undocumented, and were able to adjust status using INA 245(i), the penalty law still available to anyone who was a direct or derivative beneficiary of an immigrant visa petition or labor certification filed before April 30, 2001.