Officers enforcing this law will be required to show probable cause of any detention or arrest the same as in any other arrest. or would you rather I call them “warrantless” arrests since that sounds so much nastier. Arrests without warrant are common since most arrests are made on probable cause of a crime being committed which then requires either a bond or hearing. This does not excuse an officer from making a false arrest or detention as a judge or magistrate still determine if law was met.

As far as proof of citizenship, this should be fairly easy to provide if you are in this country legally. Whether it is a US license, passport, work visa or some other document, I don’t see how this is a problem. If the person in question “forgot” their documentation, the officer will investigate further until proof can be obtained if it is obtainable. If I for example, didn’t have identification, and I was suspected of being here illegally, there is enough probable cause in existence that can be provided either by fax, phone or computer from various agencies to verify my status.

If you do not agree with the law, what is your recommendation? If you are for open borders then say it. Otherwise how do you start fixing a problem which has been out of control for so long? My answer would be to start enforcing the laws we have, which include immigration status. The Arizona law has done nothing other then put the power to do just that into the hands of local law enforcement rather then a handful of Federal Agents.

Lastly, stop trying to make this a racial situation. Its pathetic.

The Arizonian’s who support the law state that the phrase “lawful contact” between a person and a police officer (which will permit the officer to ask that person for proof of citizenship) is no more than a useful tool allowing that officer during a traffic stop (or warrant issue, etc.) to ask for such proof. But, the phrase can only be legally interpreted as the opposite of “illegal contact” — meaning that any “contact” a nod, a meeting of the eyes, or a simple exchange of pleasantries is a “lawful contact” (because no law was broken). Be careful of who you look in the eye when visiting Arizona.

The law gives any officer the ability to approach anyone he suspects may be in the state illegally and demand proof of U.S. citizenship. If that person cannot provide such proof, that officer can (without warrant) arrest that person. Never mind that the person may, in fact, be a legal citizen. The law’s ability to allow the arrest & detention of *anyone* based solely on a single officer’s perception regarding that person’s perceived citizenship status is Orwellian.

What criteria will law enforcement officers use to gauge a person’s citizenship status? Color of their skin? Accent? Style of dress? Religious practice?

For those who feel they may be a target for arrest, what “proof” may they carry on their person to prove that they aren’t illegal? The Arizona law refers to U.S. Code 1373(c) when it comes to defining what qualifies as “verification”. Unfortunately, U.S.C. 1373(c) only requires the INS to respond to requests of citizenship status for individuals from local law enforcement officers. This means that though the Arizona law seems to imply that there is such a thing as a “citizenship I.D.”, it actually only refers to a local officer’s ability to request of the INS certain questions (and obligates the INS to respond to those questions) for anyone within the local jurisdiction’s custody.

Meaning, there is no way to “prove” that you’re a citizen if an officer asks you to provide proof of citizenship. The law only provides blanket protection to any officer who wishes to arrest anyone, without warrant, for no cause (other than looking like you might be in the country illegally). Once you’re in custody, the local jailers can then ask the INS for any information it might have on you.

Do you look (sound, dress, express yourself) like you’re a U.S. citizen? Are you sure? If you go to Arizona, you might be surprised what qualifies as suspicious looking — and be really surprised what local officials can do to you based solely on their suspicions.

Another aspect of our drug laws: I ran into a friend I hadn’t seen in a long time and asked her about her two sons. She said they were in the prison and that they should have been set free last year but they were not set free because they hadn’t taken the drug rehab course. The reason they hadn’t taken the course was that it wasn’t being offered. You can see that for-profit prisons are probably a really expensive way to accomplish nothing.

I am 63 years old and have seen the war on drugs as a costly failure of law enforcement, and the justice system. Marijuana has a medicinal value to people in pain. Let’s get off the high horse and get on with more important aspects of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.