This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Visual Art

Arizona State Bill 1070

This essay is written by:

Louis PHD Verified writer

Finished papers: 5822

4.75

Proficient in:

Psychology, English, Economics, Sociology, Management, and Nursing

You can get writing help to write an essay on these topics
100% plagiarism-free

Hire This Writer

Arizona State Bill 1070

Despite various protests, many states have chosen to take a part of immigration laws that have the potential for violating fundamental human rights. New immigration legislation in Arizona State highlights a series of state-level policies that have a significant and lasting impact on migrant families. For instance, Sophia J. Wallace in “Papers Please: State Level Anti- Immigrant Legislation in the Wake of Arizona’s SB 1070, explains the overall intake of Arizona’s SB 1070. It criminalizes failure to provide evidence of legal immigration status as a state misdemeanor, requires police to determine the immigration status of a person detained in a legal stop, and detention or arrest if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person may be undocumented. It has been causing an uproar of fear and uncertainty amongst residents in Arizona that are illegal and non-illegal. Such as how Russell B. Toomey, et al. in “Impact of Arizona’s SB 1070 Immigration Law of Utilization of Health Care and Public Assistance Among Mexican-Origin Adolescent Mothers and Their Mother Figures”, explains that research has suggested that while the stated intent of policies such as SB 1070 is to increase the general sense of security among citizens, they actually increase fear among Latinos and other minority populations due to racial profiling and harassment by authorities within their communities.

Guidelines to SB 1070

The primary function of the Arizona State Bill 1070 is to curb illegal migration. In line with Wallace, the law is broad in its attack on undocumented immigrants and grants substantial power and discretion to the state and local level for enforcing immigration laws (1). Although the SB 1070 remains highly controversial, there are clear guidelines on how the law is supposed to be implemented.

The SB 1070 requires any person under suspicion to produce proof of legal immigration status. The state of Arizona legalized the practice of profiling as one of the critical tools to regulate migration and differentiate those who are presumed to be residing in the state without legal documents (Arrocha 2). Therefore, one of the guidelines of SB 1070 is that a suspect must produce proof of legal immigration status. Failure to adhere to the rule is a criminal offence which leads to legal consequences.

The SB 1070 prohibits local and state officials from restricting enforcement of federal immigration laws. Therefore, the local authorities in Arizona do not have any influence over the law. As such, any official who interferes with the implementation of the law is equally guilty of breaking the law.

Also, the Act forbids transporting, sheltering or hiring any illegal immigrants. As long as an immigrant is not legally documented, then anyone aiding their survival in Arizona is committing a criminal offence. Therefore, any Arizonian found harboring illegal documents will face legal consequences.

Lack of proper identification according to the SB 1070 rule, outrightly attracts legal consequences. Anyone who violates the Act can get a fine of up to 100$, court costs and up to 20 days in jail for a first offence. Repeat offenders attract more substantial penalties and even longer jail terms.

SB 1070 effectiveness in Arizonians

SB 1070 law gave the police the mandate to determine the immigration status of any person suspected to be an illegal immigrant during a lawful stop. The law SB 1070 law has had its effectiveness in Arizonians.

Arizonians are more likely to find employment due to the SB 1070 law. Some employers prefer to employ illegal immigrants since they provide cheap labor (Anuedo 3). Since many illegal immigrants live in fear of being deported, most of them cannot approach authorities when their rights get violated. As such, some employers take advantage of their vulnerability and use them as a source of cheap labor. When some exploitative employers discover the illegal status of their employees, they prefer to employ more illicit immigrants since they can manipulate them without any legal consequences. Many Arizonians get turned down on job opportunities since they are not a source of cheap labour. Arizona citizens can file complaints against employers when their rights are violated, to the dismay of employers. The implementation of the SB 1070 rule discourages immigrants from working since they can face prosecution. Also, employers will refrain from employing illegal immigrants since they too can face criminal charges by hiring aliens. As such, the SB 1070 rule favors Arizonians by creating more employment opportunities.

Arizonians are more secure with the implementation of the SB 1070 rule. Most terrorist attacks are carried out by immigrants who are not legally documented. The Act ensures that any suspicious person presents their legal identification documents failure to which they face criminal charges. Law enforcers can stop anyone in Arizona and asked to produce proper and legal documentation (Anuedo 2). Therefore, any illegal immigrants who intend to harm Arizonians can get quickly apprehended and prosecuted.

Public facilities and amenities in Arizona are now sufficient. Illegal immigrants tend to raise the population of any given place. Since the immigrants are neither documented nor accounted for, they deplete public resources for the rest of the legal citizens. For instance, in a public amenity such as a hospital, when the government allocates a specific amount of funding depending on the population of the particular place, the aliens are not accounted for. When the same illegal immigrants start accessing the services of the government-funded hospital, the resources get depleted quickly before the allocated time. For the dwellers of that place, it is unfortunate since the government is unlikely to provide extra funding for the hospital seeing that sufficient funds had already been allocated. Therefhttps://sharksavewriters.com/how-can-a-car-accident-attorney-aid-you-when-you-suffer-from-an-accident/ore, the SB 1070 rule will reduce the number of illegal immigrants, and as such, the facilities assigned to the public will be sufficient for them.

Also, SB 1070 promotes a sense of belonging among Arizonians. All Arizonians, including documented immigrants, will get satisfied with the state of affairs in Arizona. When the citizens of a nation continually get sidelined in job opportunities because of aliens, face insecurity as a result of illegal migration or receive insufficient public amenities due to an overflow of illegal immigrants, the citizens end up dissatisfied, unhappy and depressed. However, when a state places the needs of its citizens ahead of illegal immigrants, the citizens are satisfied and happy to be associated with their land. The case is similar for Arizonians. The implementation of the SB 1070 rule leads a crackdown on all illegal immigrants. Arizonians can feel protected, safe and satisfied with the affairs of their state.

The consequence of the SB 1070

The enactment of the SB 1070 anti-immigrant law raised a national outcry from various sectors in Arizona. Initially, the act was meant to protect the interests of Arizonians, but soon after the enactment, various stakeholders started questioning the constitutionality of the law.

One of the consequences of SB 1070 is racism. The Act seemed to support racial profiling since people from minority races were most likely to be subjected to the “show your papers” rule. The critics of the SB 1070 rule argue that citizens who belong to the minority races will be subjected to racial profiling despite them having legal documentation. The law is purposed to protect all Arizonians despite their race. However, the same rule submits some of its citizens to criminal racial and color profiling. Therefore, some Arizonians end up feeling agitated seeing that their fellow citizens who belong to the majority race are not subjected to the SB 1070 rule.

Furthermore, the SB 1070 rule increases the rates of hate crime. In an attempt to curb corruption and terrorism, most suspicious non-natives are required by the law to provide proof of legal documentation. The vigorous and heavy penalties on illegal immigrants paint a negative picture in Arizonians. Due to the rule, most of them believe that all immigrants are invaders and as such, they should return to their countries of origin. Some legal immigrants are subjected to hate crimes such as being branded as invaders or getting treated as lesser citizens. Hate crimes against immigrants bring about negative results for the immigrants as well as Arizonians. The legal immigrants, some of them children born in Arizona are left feeling insecure about their place in society; they do not belong to their native countries since they have US citizenship, but their fellow Arizonians discriminate them. On the other hand, Arizonians drive away very resourceful immigrants by subjecting them to hate crimes and victimizing them.

Also, the SB 1070 rule paints a negative image of the Arizonian police force. The Arizona Police Department was mandated with the task of implementing the SB 1070 anti-immigration rule (Fisher et al., 6). According to the Act, the police are to ask for proof of legal documentation from any suspicious person. Any suspicious person without legal documentation, otherwise known as papers, would face criminal charges and pay substantial penalties or serve a jail term. In the case where a suspicious person provided the police with the legal documentation, the immigrant might perceive the police as racist because of color or racial profiling. On the other hand, the Arizona Police Department is in a tight corner because the same law prohibits them from restricting the enhancement of the SB 1070 law. As such, the police have no choice but to enforce the Act which in turn taints their image to the legal immigrants as well as the general population.

Besides, the SB 1070 rule affects the children of illegal immigrants. The harassment of immigrants extends to the children. Due to fear of harassments and substantial penalties, many immigrants restricted their children from attending school and accessing basic amenities. Some of the children have US citizenship acquired by birth, but, due to the harassment accorded to their parents, they too suffer the same fate.

The entire State of Arizona was painted as authoritarian due to the implementation of the SB 1070 rule. The Act requires any person apprehended by the authority to produce legal identification documents failure to which one faces criminal charges. As such, the police expect total compliance and obedience because disobedience proves that one is an illegal immigrant. In line with Fisher et al., police officers who are predisposed to authoritarianism typically have an inclined intolerance towards immigrants (8). As such, immigrants have no assurance that the law enforcers will respect their rights in their attempt to determine their legal status. Police officers who encounter resistant immigrants are more likely to harass them since they too can face criminal charges for failure to enact the law. Therefore, the State of Arizona is authoritarian since it expects their police officers to implement the SB 1070 rule at all costs failure to which they face criminal charges and substantial penalties including jail terms.

Another consequence of the SB 1070 law is the lack of clear guidelines for suspecting an illegal immigrant. The lack of clear instructions creates confusion in implementing if the Act. The Arizona Police Department was asked to apprehend any person with reasonable suspicion; however, they were not given the measures to determine the “reasonable suspicion”. As such, many police officers resorted to using illegal means such as racial profiling and color profiling to determine whether a person is suspicious or not. More confusion arises when the police do not apprehend the people that look like Arizona natives based on their color and physical appearance. Such profiling makes it seem as if the SB 1070 rule was explicitly meant for immigrants whether legal or illegal. It is a violation of human and civil rights to suspect one of a criminal offence by the aid of visual and auditory cues based on their physical appearance. Also, it is impossible to prove that one is guilty of a crime based on their skin color, accent or manner of dressing. As such it was impossible for the Arizona police to apprehend a suspicious person without violating human and civil rights. To that end, Arizona should have put in place better strategies of implementing the SB 1070 rule, rather than just physical appearance.

Conclusion

The SB 1070 anti-immigration rule was meant to protect the interests of Arizonians. However, the Act was not well thought-out, and it has resulted in more harm than good. The anti-immigration rule raises many controversies mainly because of color and racial profiling. The only measure for determining whether one is a suspicious character is solely based on visual or auditory cues. Many legal immigrants are subjected to the anti-immigration rule and harassed only because of their physical appearance. The law also paints the state of Arizona as an authoritarian state due to the pressure exerted on the police officers. Due to the demand of their profession, many police officers in Arizona are intolerant towards immigrants since they are eager to punish illegal immigrants and in the process, they harass legal immigrants. In conclusion, the SB 1070 rule oppresses immigrants in Arizona due to the lack of a reasonable means of determining whether one is a suspicious character or not.

 

 

Works Consulted

Amuedo, Dorantes, Catalina, and Fernando Lozano. “On the Effectiveness of Sb1070 in Arizona.” Economic Inquiry, vol. 53, no. 1, Jan. 2015, pp. 335-351. EBSCOhost, doi:10.111/ecin.12138. Accessed 21 Feb. 2019.

Arrocha, William. “Arizona Senate Bill 1070: Targeting the Other and Generating Discourses and Practices of Discrimination and Hate.” Journal of Hate Studies, vol. 9 no. 1, Dec. 2010, pp. 65-92. EBSCOhost, login.ezp.mesacc.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=7548673&siite=ehost-live. Accessed 21 Feb. 2019.

Fisher, Emily L., et al. “A Model of Authoritarianism, Social Norms, and Personal Values: Implications for Arizona Law Enforcement and Immigration Policy.” Analyses of Social Issues & Public Policy, vol. 11, no. 1, Dec. 2011, pp. 285–299. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01247.x.Accessed 21 Feb. 2019.

Wallace, Sophia J. “Papers Please: State-Level Anti-Immigrant Legislation in the Wake of Arizona’s SB 1070.” Political Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell), vol. 129, no.2, June 2014, pp. 261-291. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1002/polq.12178. Accessed 21 Feb. 2019.

 

 

 

 

 

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask