Funny Things Illegal Aliens Supporters Say (Pelosi, Spanish, Hispanics, insurance)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your first part. You skipped right over the part where it says that LE has to make LAWFUL CONTACT FIRST. They can't just make contact with people they feel are suspicious, they have to actually break a law first.
This is wrong and why I purposefully used the 1st draft of the bill. They changed it a month after because it pretty much said exactly what I am saying it said and even the state realized it was not going to pass as written.
The edits will change the language of the law’s sentence regarding “lawful contact.” The new text will read “lawful stop, detention or arrest.” I could probably fuss about “lawful stop,” but I guess “stop” has a pretty sound legal definition in most state codes.
Quote:
The second part I think you're a bit confused on as well. The citizens have a right to sue if LE IS NOT making LAWFUL CONTACT at first and just operating on suspicion alone.
In other words, Arizonans can sue government entities, state or local, if they believe those entities aren't fully enforcing the law -- including, of course, this new law itself. The government could be on the hook for penalties as high as $5000 per day.
From actual law:
Quote:
A person who is a legal resident of this state may bring an action in superior court to challenge any official or agency of this state or a county, city, town or other political subdivision of this state that adopts or implements a policy or practice that limits or restricts the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law.
This is wrong and why I purposefully used the 1st draft of the bill. They changed it a month after because it pretty much said exactly what I am saying it said and even the state realized it was not going to pass as written.
So you were using a rough draft and trying to pass it off as the signed legislation? No wonder you are so confused.
A rough draft lol. It was the proposal on the books until America laughed at AZ for being a racist dirt hole.
You'd think someone here telling me to "read the law" and saying things like "you obviously don't understand any of it" would catch that I was talking about the law before being rewritten but I guess not.
A rough draft lol. It was the proposal on the books until America laughed at AZ for being a racist dirt hole.
You'd think someone here telling me to "read the law" and saying things like "you obviously don't understand any of it" would catch that I was talking about the law before being rewritten but I guess not.
Is it the signed legislation????
Why would you worry about a proposal that was CHANGED? And then try to present it as fact? Credibility?
It was a fact and yes it was signed. Herp a derp. They changed it after it got multiple challenges immediately lulz.
You really have a reading problem. Or a crediblity issue.
Is it the SIGNED LEGISLATION? If it was rewritten it is no longer an issue, DUH!
herp a derp...is that from 5th grade?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
