SB1070 - Justified Profiling?

After reading AZ SB1070, I'm still opposed to supporting the state's efforts. The portion that offends me "FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c)."

What the heck is "LAWFUL CONTACT"? If I call the cops because I got robbed, will the police ask me for my immigration documents? Will they ask if I have Spanish accent? If I say I'm a citizen and don't have "papers", will they let me go while they verify my story? This one section seems rife with opportunity for abuse.

While I disagree with the AZ law, I understand why they feel the need to take action. Our current immigration policy is nonexistent - we appear to have no actual policy. We have no strategy for deciding how many immigrants we want, no way to ensure that immigrants are interested in learning about our laws, culture, and heritage - because there is a huge demand for immigrants and no legal way to fill it. This lack of policy allows our economy's labor needs to be filled by non-citizens, who are treated poorly by their employers because of their lack of access to the legal system. Costs for healthcare, schools, and other social systems are passed on to taxpayers because illegal immigrant employees are paid at below market wages and don't have the money for health care, adequate housing (and resultant property taxes), etc.

Part of the states' difficulty to cope with illegal immigration is that they don't really have the tools to deal with the issue - the federal government needs to lead in drying up the demand for illegal immigrants by punishing those who employ them. This effort might not be popular (increased costs for agricultural goods, fewer political donations by the impacted business community) but it is their job. The tools states have tend to be hamhanded ones like the first paragraph of SB1070. The federal government needs to develop a real strategy that manages the need for labor with enforcement that will prevent illegal immigrants from remaining in our labor force.

But none of that justifies a law that brings to mind images from Nazi Germany or the pre-Civil War American south - where people could have their liberty curtailed or ended by a peace officer who might be merely mistaken, might want an additional payoff, or who might just be a bad guy who thought they loved Jews or should be treated like the other enslaved blacks. And while the law might indeed find some illegal immigrants, is it worth humiliating and inconveniencing countless citizens in that effort? If you think that you or someone you care about might be one of the ones harassed, the answer has to be no. While the language in SB1070 means we could all be subject to its questioning of our immigration status and proof thereof, regardless of our appearance or accent, increasing the number of people who might be harrassed by a law doesn't make it better. THis is a bad law, which our own nation's history indicates will be used for nefarious purposes.

None of this even considers the moral dimension - caring for strangers, the poor, and the least among us are only a few of the Christian values violated by this law. Jim Wallis' take on this issue is valuable for the issues he raises.

There may be a lot to like in SB1070, but America should be way past allowing for harassing people about their immigration status.