Arizona’s Immigration

Arizona has initiated its own immigration policy, and in doing so it has raised questions as to the constitutionality of its legislation. One can’t help but question this administration’s position on the constitutionality of Arizona’s actions to alleviate the impact illegal immigration is having on the State. This administration has taken more actions to expand the power of the Administrative Branch than any previous administration in recent history, and has ignored many of the founding basic principles of our Constitution. It is not clear how the Supreme Court is going to rule if this case comes before it, but this column is going is going to take an affirmative position, if comments made prove by the Governor prove to be true. Arizona has stated that their legislation is the same as that of the Federal Government’s legislation, and that its intent is to follow strict guidelines in applying the guidelines laid out in the government’s legislation.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 was passed to resolve our illegal immigration problem, but the Federal government has failed to comply with this Act, so here we are in 2010 still trying to resolve our illegal immigration problem. One can hardly blame Arizona for taking action that may alleviate a portion of its problems. The government continually tries to initiate new comprehensive immigration legislation, but without complying with the requirements of the 1986 Act we are going to end up in the same position that we are in now. The one aspect that has not been complied with is the control of the migration through our southern border. In light of the administrations’ unwillingness to comply with this critical requirement, one finds it difficult to fault the Arizona legislative body for passing this legislation. If it’s a fact that the state’s legislation mirrors that of the Federal government’s legislation, then one may suggest that Arizona’s legislation should be acceptable because it is not inconsistent with that of the Federal government’s.

The action taken by Arizona’s legislative body and the reaction of the Federal government is highlighting the government’s unwillingness to comply with the 1986Act’s prime requirement. It lends credence to the speculation that the illegal immigration condition is being used to enhance the power of the administration. It has been suggested that any person receiving citizenship be “a person of good character, and taking oath of affirmation prescribed by law, to support the constitution of the United States...” This quote was from the first legislation on immigration in 1790. The qualification dealing with the good character of a person appears to be another aspect that our legislative body has little interest in enforcing. The actions of both the Legislative and Administrative Branches of government would seem to indicate that these bodies are really not interested in protecting our form of government. We have to stop listening to the rhetoric and look at the actions of those exercising power.

The real danger of ignoring the illegal immigration problem is not even being addressed. We are experiencing a substantial change in our social ethos that is going to move us further from the basic principles that were set forth by our Founding Fathers. It is clear that those in favor of allowing the continuation of illegal immigration view the southern border in much the same way as U.S. citizens see the state borders. The problem is that this view only goes one way and that is in our direction; the nations to the south of us exercise their right to enforce their immigration laws, but we are expected to ignore ours. Just the fact that individuals have entered this country illegally calls into question their character, not to mention any other infractions they may have committed while in the U.S. The problems related to our immigration policies must be addressed realistically, and soon before anymore harm is done to our society; this should not be accomplished by listening to the very individuals that have flaunted our laws or are seeking more political power. It is doubtful that we have enough political representatives with backbones to address this issue in a responsible manner.

Charlie Allo