Changes

(a) Shall order the employer to terminate the employment of all 43 unauthorized aliens.

(a) Shall order the employer to terminate the employment of all 43 unauthorized aliens.

(b) Shall order the employer to be subject to a three year probationary period for the business location where the unauthorized alien

(b) Shall order the employer to be subject to a three-year probationary period for the business location where the unauthorized alien

====Page 10====

====Page 10====

(a) Order the employer to terminate the employment of all unauthorized aliens.

(a) Order the employer to terminate the employment of all unauthorized aliens.

(b) Order the employer to be subject to a five year probationary period for the business location where the unauthorized alien performed work. During the probationary period the employer shall file quarterly reports in the form provided in section 23-722.01 with the county attorney

(b) Order the employer to be subject to a five-year probationary period for the business location where the unauthorized alien performed work. During the probationary period the employer shall file quarterly reports in the form provided in section 23-722.01 with the county attorney

====Page 14====

====Page 14====

In 2005 as a result of the Muller vs. Mena case, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that under Federal Law, cops can pull you over for no reason and demand to see your immigration papers. However, under Arizona’s new law, they do have to have a reason.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvmypNc7c74</ref>  

In 2005 as a result of the Muller vs. Mena case, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that under Federal Law, cops can pull you over for no reason and demand to see your immigration papers. However, under Arizona’s new law, they do have to have a reason.<ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvmypNc7c74</ref>  

If illegal entrants to the U.S spend a total of 1 year’s unlawful time in the U.S or are ordered deported by a federal judge (even after spending less than 1 year in the U.S) and then they leave and return or attempt to return to the United States illegally, they become permanently inadmissible. This so called permanent bar is found at § I.N.A 212(a)(9)(C), 8 U.S.C § 1182(a)(9)(c).<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=8vNnXnJChsoC&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=u.s+immigration+laws&source=bll&ots=bEJJd7iHua&sig=BwWU_tuYtZ8BXRu0DaLnMRQZeS4&hl=en&ei=gmYATKzRK8LflgfgjoH8CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=18&ved=0CGwQ6AEwEQ#v=onepage&q=u.s%20immigration%20laws&f=false</ref>

If illegal entrants to the U.S spend a total of 1 year’s unlawful time in the U.S or are ordered deported by a federal judge (even after spending less than 1 year in the U.S) and then they leave and return or attempt to return to the United States illegally, they become permanently inadmissible. This so-called permanent bar is found at § I.N.A 212(a)(9)(C), 8 U.S.C § 1182(a)(9)(c).<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=8vNnXnJChsoC&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=u.s+immigration+laws&source=bll&ots=bEJJd7iHua&sig=BwWU_tuYtZ8BXRu0DaLnMRQZeS4&hl=en&ei=gmYATKzRK8LflgfgjoH8CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=18&ved=0CGwQ6AEwEQ#v=onepage&q=u.s%20immigration%20laws&f=false</ref>

If an alien fails to update the government with a residential address every three months, regardless of whether the address has changed would render the alien deportable.<ref>http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/Immigration</ref>

If an alien fails to update the government with a residential address every three months, regardless of whether the address has changed would render the alien deportable.<ref>http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/Immigration</ref>

But the federal government’s own data suggests that this is exactly what’s occurring. Cooperating jurisdictions simply run the names and fingerprints of all persons being booked after arrest through a federal database of illegal aliens. If there’s a “hit,” the suspect is detained and referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for possible deportation.  

But the federal government’s own data suggests that this is exactly what’s occurring. Cooperating jurisdictions simply run the names and fingerprints of all persons being booked after arrest through a federal database of illegal aliens. If there’s a “hit,” the suspect is detained and referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for possible deportation.  

It doesn’t matter what type of crime the suspect may have committed – even if the suspect turns out to be innocent. ICE statistics compiled last November indicate that just 10 percent of the 110,000 persons identified through Secure Communities were potential felons, but only a small percentage of these turned out to be guilty. In other words, this is not a “criminal alien” program at all. It’s a way of weeding out any illegal alien who is even suspected of a crime.  

It doesn’t matter what type of crime the suspect may have committed – even if the suspect turns out to be innocent. ICE statistics compiled last November indicate that just 10 percent of the 110,000 persons identified through Secure Communities were potential felons, but only a small percentage of these turned out to be guilty. In other words, this is not a “criminal alien” program at all. It’s a way of weeding out any illegal alien who is even suspected of a crime.  

And what crimes will get a person flagged in the program? Loitering, for example, or “nuisance” crimes like public urination. The “criminal” net is potentially so wide, in fact, that in a worst case scenario thousands of illegal aliens who merely congregate on street corners in search of day jobs could one day be hauled in.

And what crimes will get a person flagged in the program? Loitering, for example, or “nuisance” crimes like public urination. The “criminal” net is potentially so wide, in fact, that in a worst-case scenario thousands of illegal aliens who merely congregate on street corners in search of day jobs could one day be hauled in.

Sounds a lot like racial profiling. The agreements signed between ICE and local authorities under Secure Communities do not include antiprofiling training or even operational guidance – just a one-line statement that federal antidiscrimination laws should be upheld. That’s not enough.

Sounds a lot like racial profiling. The agreements signed between ICE and local authorities under Secure Communities do not include antiprofiling training or even operational guidance – just a one-line statement that federal antidiscrimination laws should be upheld. That’s not enough.

And it’s not just illegal aliens who may suffer. Like other federal databases, the one being used by Secure Communities still has a fairly high error rate – in fact, according to the ICE’s own statistics, 5 percent of the positive “hits” turn out to legal immigrants or US citizens, not illegal aliens. Which means thousands of people could be wrongly detained, and even deported, under this program.  

And it’s not just illegal aliens who may suffer. Like other federal databases, the one being used by Secure Communities still has a fairly high error rate – in fact, according to the ICE’s own statistics, 5 percent of the positive “hits” turn out to legal immigrants or US citizens, not illegal aliens. Which means thousands of people could be wrongly detained, and even deported, under this program.  

#A member of the Somalian Al Shabaab terrorist group may be trying to get into Texas through Mexico. U.S. Homeland Security has asked law enforcement in Houston to be on the lookout for a suspected member of Al Shabaab, an Al Qaida ally based in Somalia.<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37368665</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlSrvfP_Ua8</ref> With this in mind, do you prefer Arizona’s new enforcement law against illegal immigration over terrorists attempting to cross the border illegally to commit acts of terror in the United States? Or do you prefer terrorists attempting to cross the border illegally to commit acts of terror in the United States over Arizona’s enforcement law against illegal immigration? Which of the 2 options would you pick if you had to and why?

#A member of the Somalian Al Shabaab terrorist group may be trying to get into Texas through Mexico. U.S. Homeland Security has asked law enforcement in Houston to be on the lookout for a suspected member of Al Shabaab, an Al Qaida ally based in Somalia.<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37368665</ref><ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlSrvfP_Ua8</ref> With this in mind, do you prefer Arizona’s new enforcement law against illegal immigration over terrorists attempting to cross the border illegally to commit acts of terror in the United States? Or do you prefer terrorists attempting to cross the border illegally to commit acts of terror in the United States over Arizona’s enforcement law against illegal immigration? Which of the 2 options would you pick if you had to and why?

#Let's see if you understand the bill if you have sincerely read it. In your own words, how would you summarize the bill?

#Let's see if you understand the bill if you have sincerely read it. In your own words, how would you summarize the bill?

#Liberals, now that you've read everything here, what's your response? Your responses should be made in the form of a youtube video.

#Liberals, now that you've read everything here, what's your response? Your responses should be made in the form of a YouTube video.

==References==

==References==