Mexican gov't slams Arizona immigration law

[fightingquaker13]

Here's an article fom Phoenix on illegals take on the law. It seems to be working alredy. New Mexico and Tx. better follow suit quickly though......
FQ13

Illegal immigrants plan to leave over Ariz. law
 
 
 Email this Story

Apr 28, 8:44 PM (ET)

By AMANDA LEE MYERS
 
(AP) Day Laborers stand along Arizona Ave Wednesday, April 28, 2010 in Chandler, Ariz. Arizona's...
Full Image
 
 
 
Google sponsored links
Immigration Reform Bills - Find the facts on upcoming immigration bills. Sign up here.
www.AmericasVoiceOnline.org
 
 
University of Phoenix® - Learn how You can earn a Degree at an Arizona Campus Near You.
Phoenix.edu
 
 
 
 
 

 

PHOENIX (AP) - Many of the cars that once stopped in the Home Depot parking lot to pick up day laborers to hang drywall or do landscaping now just drive on by.

Arizona's sweeping immigration bill allows police to arrest illegal immigrant day laborers seeking work on the street or anyone trying to hire them. It won't take effect until summer but it is already having an effect on the state's underground economy.

"Nobody wants to pick us up," Julio Loyola Diaz says in Spanish as he and dozens of other men wait under the shade of palo verde trees and lean against a low brick wall outside the east Phoenix home improvement store.

Many day laborers like Diaz say they will leave Arizona because of the law, which also makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally and directs police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants.

 
(AP) Jose Armenta, center, a 33-year-old illegal immigrant from Los Mochis, Sinaloa, Mexico, finds shade...
Full Image
 
 
Supporters of the law hope it creates jobs for thousands of Americans.

"We want to drive day labor away," says Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's sponsors.

An estimated 100,000 illegal immigrants have left Arizona in the past two years as it cracked down on illegal immigration and its economy was especially hard hit by the Great Recession. A Department of Homeland Security report on illegal immigrants estimates Arizona's illegal immigrant population peaked in 2008 at 560,000, and a year later dipped to 460,000.

The law's supporters hope the departure of illegal immigrants will help dismantle part of the underground economy here and create jobs for thousands of legal residents in a state with a 9.6 percent unemployment rate.

Kavanagh says day labor is generally off the books, and that deprives the state of much-needed tax dollars. "We'll never eliminate it, just like laws against street prostitution," he says. "But we can greatly reduce the prevalence."

Day laborers do jobs including construction, landscaping and household work for cash paid under the table. Those jobs have been harder to find since the housing industry collapsed here several years ago.

Standing near potted trees and bushes for sale at a Home Depot in east Phoenix, Diaz, 35, says he may follow three families in his neighborhood who moved to New Mexico because of the law. He says a friend is finding plenty of work in Dallas.

Diaz says he has too much to lose by staying - he's supporting a wife and infant son back home in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, across the border from El Paso, Texas.

"They depend on me to survive," he says. "I'm not going to wait for police to come and arrest me."

Jose Armenta, a 33-year-old illegal immigrant from Mexico's western coast, is already planning to move to Utah within the next 20 days because of a combination of the economy and the new law.

"A lot of people drive by," he says as he watched nearby cars speeding past, "and they yell, 'Hey, go back to Mexico!'"

Analysts say it's too soon to tell what lasting effects the law will have on the state's underground work force, which also includes baby sitters, maids and cooks.

A study of immigrants in Arizona published in 2008 found that non-citizens, mostly in the country illegally, held an estimated 280,000 full-time jobs. The study by researcher Judith Gans at the University of Arizona examined 2004 data, finding that they contributed about 8 percent of the state's economic output, or $29 billion.

Losing hundreds of thousands of unskilled laborers wouldn't hurt the state's economy in the short term, but it could limit the economy's ability to grow once it recovers, says Marshall Vest, director of the Economic and Business Research Center at the University of Arizona's Eller College of Management.

Legal workers who are willing to take any available job now will become more choosy if the unemployment rate falls back to low levels seen before the recession hit.

"That's really the question, as to whether the existing population is willing to work those (low-level) jobs," Vest says. "I think economics provides the answer. If job openings have no applicants, then businesses need to address that by raising the offered wage."

Some illegal immigrants, however, intended to stick around.

Natalia Garcia, 35, from Mexico City, says she and her husband - a day laborer - will stay so their daughters - both born in the U.S. - can get a good education and learn English. The couple have been living in Arizona illegally for the last 10 years.

"Mexico doesn't have a lot of opportunities," she says. "Here, we work honestly, and we have a better life."

Olga Sanchez, 32, from southern Mexico, lives in Phoenix illegally with her two brothers, who are 21 and 17. While the youngest boy is in high school, all three work and send money back home to their parents.

"This law is very bad for us," says Sanchez, who gets about $250 a week cleaning three houses. "I'm afraid of what's going to happen."

She says the family is going to wait and see if the law takes effect and what the fallout will be before deciding whether to leave. The law is certain to be challenged in court; Phoenix, Tucson and Flagstaff already are considering lawsuits.

"All I ask from God is a miracle for us to stay here and work," she says.

---

Associated Press writer Bob Christie contributed to this report.

[Bic]

Arizona really doesn't have to prosecute, and therefore risk litigation by, anyone under this law, it's kinda like being the first one in your neighbourhood to put up the "Alarm By..." or "Beware of the Dog" signs at the beginning of an increase in crime. Well done Arizona!

[Solus]

Well, that is effective.

The story bought another point to mind.   Seems that it might be good to change existing law to state that you are a citizen of the US if born here to a mother who is here legally.  Thoughts?

Also, I have no idea what it takes for someone to enter the US legally.  In particularly Mexicans who wish to come here to work as day laborers or otherwise?  Anyone know?

[billt]

They can scream all the want. The fact is no one is going to hire them anymore, and there is no other reason they are here. That leaves two choices. Stay, bitch and starve. Or else hoof it back to sunny Meh-He-Co. They'll choose the latter, taking the pick axes they swore to kill us with.  Bill T.

[fightingquaker13]

Well, that is effective.

The story bought another point to mind.   Seems that it might be good to change existing law to state that you are a citizen of the US if born here to a mother who is here legally.  Thoughts?

Also, I have no idea what it takes for someone to enter the US legally.  In particularly Mexicans who wish to come here to work as day laborers or otherwise?  Anyone know?

In answer to the question of birthright citizenship, its in the 14th ammendment. Good luck changing that.
As to the second point, day laborers, thats one of the more controversial, but maybe neccessary parts of "Comprehensive Reform". Specifically the subject of guest worker provisions. Now we have the H1-B visa, but an employer, not an empoyee has to ask for it. Its used for everything from cane cutters to software designers. I think its being abused to drive wages down and it probably will be under a guest worker program. Agriculture is the only area where I'm sympathetic.
FQ13

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

I don't know the law but was listening to my angry, right wing, conservative, radio station here in the Boston area (yes, there IS one) the other afternoon and an attorney called the station.  He basically said that no matter what the law in AZ has done, it's been federal law since the 40's that LEGAL Naturalized citizens in the United States are required to carry identification to prove it.

So the screaming from the left is moot, just screaming!

[fightingquaker13]

I picked this up off the WEB. Amnesty International is dinging Mexico over abuse of central Americans in sunny Mexico. My favorite bit?

One of the main issues, Amnesty says, is that migrants fear they will be deported if they complain to Mexican authorities about abuses.

At present, Article 67 of Mexico's Population Law says, "Authorities, whether federal, state or municipal ... are required to demand that foreigners prove their legal presence in the country, before attending to any issues."

Gee, this sounds a lot like the Az. law. What kind of cojones does it take to condemn a law that mirrors your own? I hope the Az. governor gets in front of every TV camera that will stand still long enough and shouts this from the rooftops!
In other news, Bloomberg calls the Az. bill, "National Suicide" as we will lose our edge without these folks. Sorry, once again your honor, you're ass backwards. Not controlling our borders? Thats national sicide.
FQ13

[Hazcat]

In answer to the question of birthright citizenship, its in the 14th ammendment. Good luck changing that.
As to the second point, day laborers, thats one of the more controversial, but maybe neccessary parts of "Comprehensive Reform". Specifically the subject of guest worker provisions. Now we have the H1-B visa, but an employer, not an empoyee has to ask for it. Its used for everything from cane cutters to software designers. I think its being abused to drive wages down and it probably will be under a guest worker program. Agriculture is the only area where I'm sympathetic.
FQ13

The 14th amendment was for freed slaves and their offspring.  A LIBERAL SCOTUS 'interpreted'  it to mean anyone born here.  We need a Fed law that states either your mother or father must be a natural citizen for the child to be a citizen.

[fightingquaker13]

The 14th amendment was for freed slaves and their offspring.  A LIBERAL SCOTUS 'interpreted'  it to mean anyone born here.  We need a Fed law that states either your mother or father must be a natural citizen for the child to be a citizen.

I'd hardly call the mid 19th Century Court liberal. Anyway this just goes to point out how stupid the doctrine of "original intent" is. Do we know what the intent was? Or just what words were used to sell it? Whose intent? The authors, the Congress that voted on it or the various state legislatures that passed it? Its a fool's game. What we have are words on a page. In this case (just like "Congress Shall Make No Law, or "Shall Not Be Infringed) the words "All Persons Born or Naturalized", leave zero wiggle room. A new ammendment would be necessary. I for one, won't be supporting one either. As anti-illegal as I am, the 14th, just like the Bill of Rights, doesn't bear messing with. Without it, none of the Bill of rights would be incorporated.
FQ13

[Hazcat]

Children of immigrants

In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person who

    * is born in the United States
    * of parents who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of a foreign power
    * whose parents have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States
    * whose parents are there carrying on business and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity of the foreign power to which they are subject

becomes, at the time of his birth, a citizen of the United States by virtue of the first clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Although any language in Wong Kim Ark that suggests the Court's opinion and rationale could be expanded to include the children of illegal immigrants would be mere dicta as Wong's parents were in the country legally.[28] Children born to foreign diplomats or, hypothetically, to hostile enemy forces or born on U.S. territory while it is under the control of a foreign power, are not considered subject to U.S. jurisdiction and therefore are not citizens at birth.[29] The distinction between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants was not clear at the time of the decision of Wong Kim Ark.[30]

The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment,[31] although it has generally been assumed that they are.[28] When accorded automatic birthright citizenship based on birth on American soil, a newborn's status is generally unaffected by the legal status or citizenship of that individual's mother or father.