PHOENIX — Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has vetoed a bill to require President Barack Obama and other presidential candidates to prove their U.S. citizenship before their names can appear on the state’s ballot.
The bill vetoed by Brewer on Monday would have made Arizona the first state to pass such a requirement. According to My Fox Phoenix, the governor said the measure “is a bridge too far.”
The Arizona proposal would require political parties and presidential candidates to hand in affidavits stating a candidate’s citizenship and age and to provide the candidate’s birth certificate and a sworn statement saying where the candidate has lived for 14 years.
If candidates don’t have a copy of their birth certificates, they could meet the requirement by providing baptismal or circumcision certificates, hospital birth records and other documents.
“I never imagined being presented with a bill that could require candidates for president of the greatest and most powerful nation on earth to submit their ‘early baptismal or circumcision certificates’,” said Brewer in light of vetoing the bill, according to My Fox Phoenix. “This measure creates significant new problems while failing to do anything constructive for Arizona.”
Jan Brewer did the right thing. AZ seems hell-bent on proving itself the most bass-akward state inu the union. Jan Brewer did a great deal to help its legislature from reaching dubious honor. If the birther people only knew how badly the rest of the country is laughing at them. What do they hope to accomplish?
Brewer also vetoed a bill that would have allowed guns on campus along right of ways. She had this to say:
The bill didn’t define public right of way and also could have been interpreted to apply to K-12 schools in addition to universities and community colleges, Brewer said in her veto letter.
“Bills impacting our Second Amendment rights have to be crystal clear so that gun owners don’t become lawbreakers by accident,” she said.
It a pleasure to be able to compliment Governor Jan Brewer for doing the right thing.
A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the most contested provisions of an Arizona immigration law passed last year will remain blocked from taking effect, handing the Obama administration a victory in its efforts to overturn the legislation
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that put on hold key provisions of the Arizona law, which empowers police to question people whom they have a “reasonable suspicion” are illegal immigrants. The measure has triggered a fierce national debate, and the legal case is being watched by other states and advocates on both sides of the issue.
In a split decision, a three-judge panel found that U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton “did not abuse” her discretion in blocking parts of the law that, among other things, require police to check immigration status if they stop someone while enforcing other laws.
The 8th Circuit ruling should not affect how things are run in Prince William County since our law enforcement officers must check all immigration status upon arrest, regardless of the person. We need to watch carefully to make sure that none of our elected officials get some bee in the bonnet to start it up again.
Sheriff Tony Estrada has four decades of law enforcement experience under his belt, including 25 years with the Santa Cruz County Sheriffs Department. He is serving his 5th term as Santa Cruz County Sheriff, now in his 18th year.
How can 2 people tell such vastly different stories?
The AFL-CIO and one of its civil rights groups has written to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano demanding that all agreements between Arizona law enforcement and DHS cease. AFL-CIO is the largest labor union in the United States. According to the Huffington Post:
On Friday, the union conglomerate AFL-CIO and the civil rights coalition, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, became the latest institutions to urge for the isolation or boycott of Arizona when they requested that Homeland Security terminate its training of local law enforcement officials in the state.
“We write to express our deep concern with the Department of Homeland Security’s continued cooperation with state and local law enforcement in Arizona pursuant to Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (‘the 287(g) program’) in the aftermath of Arizona’s passage of Senate Bill 1070, and we ask that you immediately rescind all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona,” the letter reads.
The message continues:
“We are grateful that President Obama has spoken out to correctly call the Arizona law ‘misguided.’ However, more than words are required from the federal government at this time. As we explain below, the enforcement of Arizona’s law fundamentally depends on the use of federal government resources for the implementation of its racial profiling regime. Unless DHS terminates all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona, the federal government will be complicit in the racial profiling that lies at the heart of the Arizona law. Such a result would place the DHS at odds with this Administration’s stated views on SBI070, and at odds with basic American values of tolerance and non-discrimination.”
The letter is by far the most serious effort to date to make Arizona’s new immigration law untenable for the state. Other groups have urged economic and travel boycotts as a way to target the state government’s tourism revenues. Should DHS adopt the AFL-CIO’s suggestion (and it’s a big question whether the Department will) it would deny the state the type of law enforcement expertise that the immigration law was designed to beef up in the first place.
The legislation passed by Arizona state government would make the failure to carry immigration documents a crime. It would also give law enforcement officials fairly broad powers to detain those suspected of being in the country illegally.
“A review of DHS’s 287(g) program agreements in Arizona makes clear that once SB1070 becomes effective, DHS will be complicit in the enforcement of Arizona’s misguided law,” reads the letter, signed by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and Wade Henderson, President and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. “We urgently request that you exercise your authority to immediately rescind all 287(g) program agreements in Arizona and, in this manner, avoid making the federal government complicit in the enforcement of Arizona’s misguided law.”
So what, you might say. PWC and City of Manassas both participate in the 287(g) program. What impact will the dust up in Arizona have on our MOU with Homeland Security?
Meanwhile things show no signs of calming down in Arizona. 9500Liberty is now being shown in Tucson per request of the community. Sarah Palin is out there saying ‘We are all Arizonans now.’ Is that sort of like being a Hokie for the day?
Jan Brewer and Palin blamed President Barack Obama for the state law, saying the measure is Arizona’s attempt to enforce immigration laws because the federal government won’t do it.
“It’s time for Americans across this great country to stand up and say, ‘We’re all Arizonans now,'” Palin said. “And in clear unison we say, ‘Mr. President: Do your job. Secure our border.'”
The former Alaska governor appeared with Brewer at a brief news conference on Saturday. The event launched a website that Brewer said was an effort to educate America about border security and discourage an economic boycott of the state.
I hate being simple minded but did Mexicans just start coming across the border since President Obama took office? I could have sworn this was an issue before then. Silly me.
Republicans got that dead cat bounce from the new law in AZ. However, now they might be going back to the old adage about being careful what you wish for. Now the movers and the shakers in the GOP are worried that there might be a negative impact from this law and that some new potential base might be lost.
Arizona’s immigration law has been an immediate hit with the Republican base, but some of the party’s top strategists and rising stars worry that the harsh crackdown may do long-term damage to the GOP in the eyes of America’s Hispanic population.
From Marco Rubio to Jeb Bush to Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Republicans who represent heavily Hispanic states have been vocal in their criticism of the Arizona law, saying it overreaches. Even Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia, a conservative hero for his win last fall, has questioned the law.
And the party’s long-term thinkers worry that the Arizona law is merely a quick political fix which may create a permanent rift with the fastest growing segment of the U.S. electorate.
Most of us were unaware the Governor McDonnell had weighed in on the AZ issue.
The question people need to be asking themselves is will the new legislation help alleviate AZ’s violence. If the answer is no, then they need another strategy. They are making a bad mistake if they are curbing lawn care workers entering the United States. Meanwhile, London burns.
Specifically, Rove, Jeb Bush, and Governor Perry had the following to say:
“I think there is going to be some constitutional problems with the bill,” top Bush strategist Karl Rove said during a stop on his book tour. “I wished they hadn’t passed it, in a way.”
“I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas,” Perry said earlier this week.
Jeb Bush was also blunt: “I don’t think this is the proper approach.”
Regardless of what GOP heavy-weights say, the many folks in AZ are pleased with their legislation. It must be that RINO Karl Rove who just doesn’t have what it takes to be a conservative Republican. [Sarcasm key pressed.]
