Such talk of lawsuits is not new. A few days after the Arizona law was passed, Attorney General Eric Holder called the bill "unfortunate" and said the Department of Justice was considering a lawsuit. Shortly thereafter, he added a bit of information he initially neglected: He hadn't even read the bill — all 10 pages of it. Likewise, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano called the bill "misguided" and "bad enforcement law," before admitting that SHE hadn't read the bill either.
The entire Obama administration has been passionately opposed to the contents of the bill. They just couldn't bother themselves to find out what the contents actually were. But nearly all of the bluster surrounding the Arizona immigration bill has been grounded firmly in an ignorance of what the bill actually says.
Critics claim that the law promotes racial profiling, yet the law expressly prohibits racial profiling four separate times.
Critics claim that the law requires non-citizens to carry identification that they otherwise wouldn’t be required to carry. But federal law has required this of non-citizens since 1940! Somehow, after 70 years on the books, this law has now become a problem, with opponents of the Arizona law deeming it “racial profiling,” and turning it into a political football.
Additionally, critics claim that the law requires police officers to stop people on the streets to question them about their immigration status. In fact, this provision of the law only takes effect if a police officer has already made a “lawful stop, detention or arrest ... in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance.”
In passing S.B. 1070, Arizona took a necessary step to address the porous border that has for so long been neglected by the federal government. In Arizona alone, over 1,000 illegal border crossings occur per day, and 87 percent of those people crossing have criminal records, according to the Arizona Governor's office.
We would also be well served to remember that at least five of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers were in the United States illegally. Truly, border security and national security are inextricably linked. Much like the Obama administration has failed to address our porous border, they also continue to stand by while the radical Iranian regime, the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, continues to pursue a nuclear weapons capability unabated. We must realize that even one nuclear warhead provided by a rogue nation like Iran and smuggled over our largely unguarded southern border could change the face of the world as we know it, claiming tens of thousands of innocent American lives. Yet, somehow, this administration still fails to see the necessity of border security, attempting instead to score cheap political points with symbolic gestures.
After Arizona's immigration bill passed and polls indicated that the nation overwhelmingly supported it, President Obama announced that he had suddenly, finally decided to direct 1,200 National Guard troops to America's southern border. Even though the number of troops was drastically less than the 6,000 I, along with Arizona Sens. Jon Kyl (R) and John McCain (R), had requested, the move still sounded great on paper. However, it was then revealed that the 1,200 troops in question would almost exclusively be "boots on the desk," as opposed to actual "boots on the ground" manning the border. Furthermore, the troops would only actually be sent to the border if and when the president decided it was a necessity, once again demonstrating the president's failure to realize that the border is an issue NOW, and cannot wait until he finally decides the issue is worth addressing.
Of course, even if all 6,000 requested troops are sent, our border problems will not be completely resolved, thanks again to dramatic failures by the federal government.
The tragic death of Arizona rancher Robert Krentz made national news last month. The drug smuggler who shot Mr. Krentz in cold blood entered the nation through the San Bernardino Wildlife Refuge. Just this year, that same refuge spent $200,000 paid for by Democrats' failed, so-called stimulus to build fences that would keep Border Patrol agents OUT of the wildlife refuge.
Today, about 40 percent of the land from California to El Paso, Texas, is controlled by the federal government, much of it in the form of protected wildlife areas and national parks. Many of these cannot even be patrolled by Border Patrol agents because of fears that a plant or animal's habitat might somehow be harmed.
To add insult to injury, it was recently revealed that two federal agencies are participating in boycotts of Arizona, ostensibly to "punish" Arizona for its necessary immigration law.
If Arizona waits for the federal government to address our border issues, we are ignored. If we take matters into our own hands, we are sued and boycotted by our own government for having the audacity to protect our citizens. This lawsuit and these boycotts completely disprove the Obama administration's disingenuous claims that they are in any way interested in strengthening border security.