Republicans meet Jan Brewer Governor of Arizona

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

First off I started by saying there was an investigation and allegations of corruption. The circumstancial connection between the interested parties is very compelling IMO.

Fair enough. The later post drew my attention as it appeared to assert their was proof of corruption. As to the circumstantial evidence, you find it "very compelling". I don't. I do, however, find it worthy of appropriate investigation.

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

Secondly, Illegal Search and Seizure and Racial Profiling isn't rocket science. It's just illegal.

Yup. However, Police authorities stopping someone for reasonable suspicion of violating the law (as that term has been applied by the Supreme Court) is not an illegal search or seizure. If police start randomly stopping people simply b/c of their appearance, I suspect more than a few advocacy groups would step in and punish the offending enforcment agency.

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

Thirdly, these are alleged criminal activities. If that is actually the case I expect these people are covering their tracks as best they can and would hope that a qualified investigative agency like THE FBI for example would look into it. They have the resources to properly investigate the allegations. I obviously do not.

Actually, they are merely allegations of alleged criminal behavior b/c the circumstantial evidence you find compelling doesn't, in and of itself, state anything other than that a relationship existed. At this point, there is no allegation, other than pure speculation, anywhere that I can find that actual criminal activity occurred.

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

Lastly do you have any idea who wrote the Arizona Law? If you want I will provide twenty articles about the architects of SB-1070 and what the (IRLI) which is the legal arm of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is fighting for in States across the country.

I am familiar with Kobach and FAIR. I am familiar with their agenda. Some of which I agree with, some of which I find hate filled and detestable.

Regardless of who crafted the law, but for its attempt to pre-empt unenforced federal penalities with equivalent state penalties, how is it unconstitutional? Is the pre-emption argument the basis for your claim that the law is "ridiculous"?

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

The immigration issue needs to be addressed. I agree.

Gotta keep it legal though.

Absolutely, and to the extent that the SB 1070 attempted to pre-empt federal law, it is illegal by virtue of its unconstitutionality.