Although Federal Judge Bolton issued an injuction against the full implementation of AZ SB 1070, the famous state immigration law, parts of the law continue intact, and as of July 29, these parts will be in force (according to Human Events):
no more sanctuary cities--those polities (I believe Phoenix is one) will no longer be able to ignore immigration law or give criminals without legal immigration status a pass during arrests and processing;
no more failure to enforce the law--a $5,000 per day penalty can be invoked on those authorities who ignore their duties and do not prosecute AZ's law; citizens can sue law enforcement on their own against any policy that restricts or abnegates the state's law; State officials are required to report illegals;
businesses cannot hire illegals--and businesses are urged to use eVerify to validate a hiree's immigration status; illegals may not wait on street corners to be picked up for day labor and employer's cannot cruise the streets looking for hires; (a separate eVerify case has been upheld in District Court and by the Ninth Circuit and may go to the Supreme Ct.).
Pearce characterizes the illegal immigration problem as one of invasion and quotes the Constitution: "The United States shall guarantee that every State of this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion." Estimates of the number of illegals in AZ range from CNN's 500,000 to WorldNetDaily's projection of 400,000, and some sources guess that 100,000 have left the state due to the law, whether fully implemented or not.
Doubtless, the US was founded on immigration, and until recently, entrance into America was often simply the ability to buy a ticket on a steamship. One Great-great-great-great uncle in my son's family (on his father's side) emigrated from Kadleburg, Germany, in 1857 and settled on a farm in Illinois. In 1862, with the support of two neighbors who swore Alexander Bercher was a decent person, he became a US citizen, immediately joined an IL militia, and died at Mursfreeboro, TN, to save the Union and free the slaves.
In Alexander Bercher's time, the land west of the Mississippi was not primarily settled by European-descended homesteaders or businesses. Manifest Destiny had not developed and the nation seemed wide open and its opportunities endless. During the 20th C., a different attitude and approach circumscribed the earlier anything goes in immigration and various laws favored or restricted out-of-country settlement. The most infamous of these laws is maybe 1966's Edward Kennedy "comprehensive" law that changed how the US addressed proportions of immigrants and set out to restrict white European entries while encouraging "third world" applications.
I have cousins in Scotland, who, to this day, cannot immigrate here. They can visit. They can get two-year visas for work/visiting/touring. But, they fall outside the Kennedy 1966 purview of preferred immigrants.
They could, were they so criminally inclined, enter Mexico or Canada and simply cross the border and stay. So many have followed that prescription that the total number of illegal immigrants is widely incompatible: the lower numbers (Census) are 7,000,000 and the highest (volunteer Minute Men) is 30,000,000. If the latter, then illegals, mostly from Central and South America, mostly unvetted, ill educated, poor, and anti-assilimation are 10% of the US population. Now, there is a dreadful statistic.
Whereas, in previous waves of immigrants from the Irish of mid-19th Century to the Eastern Europeans post WW I, newcomers looked to America as a promised land, found residences, took jobs, started businesses, sent their children to school, learned the language, and applied for citizenship. The newer wave being experienced in the more recent decades apparently sees the US as a temporary refuge full of goodies and handouts but not a place to owe allegiance and permanent alliance.
Mexicans send approximately $14.5 billion out of the nation annually. These monies affect our foreign exchange and reflect income almost exclusively not taxed by US states or the federal government. I do not doubt that illegals "pay taxes" in that they pay sales tax or "sin" taxes if they buy cigarettes or liquors, but as people without official body count, known residences, and/or legal employment, they also do not pay the costs to the government that citizens are expected to contribute.
On the matter of social services, 28% of California's prison sysem is made up of illegals, 98% of gangs and gang-associated crime and violence, while 15% of CA's public schools system is comprised of children of illegals and cost $7.7 BILLION--or maybe as high as $9--a year (at least half of what illegals are sending out of country to Mexico) (California's North Country Times). And California is a state that is $19 billion in debt.
While Harry Reid claims no Hispanic would vote Republican, he represents a state with 14.4% unemployment, a cratered housing market, and estimated quarter million illegals with 130,000 in the workforce, or 5.5% of NV employees. And now, what are they working at? (Las Vegas Sun)
A 2009 National Policy Institute says illegals MAYBE cost the US a total of $338.3 BILLION, because who really knows? Just as a comparison, the entire public school system of the US with local, state, and federal costs totaled is approximately $500 BILLION a year. Illegals' unfunded costs include medical, educational, criminal, residential, and economic penalties agains the entire rest of the nation. Illegals also get Social Security and Medicare, although supposedly they don't.
Perhaps little o and minions circulated a trial balloon about legalizing or giving amnesty to all current illegals through executive order at the start of this year because the "elected" representatives in this administration are really not too fond of legislative process and would rather sign edicts like kings and tyrants. The Department of Homeland Security, at the prompting by a letter from Congress, now denies it is interested in amnesty by fiat, but says it might offer "relief" (what relief?) to those who have overstayed their visas. Do they even know who they are?
Years ago, in 1967, a German cousin of my ex-dead husband (we'll call him Garrick Bercher, not his real name) applied for a visa to visit and work in the US. He needed 1) to have a sponsor (my mother-in-law) and a 2) job (secured by his cousin) and 3) a place to live (our apartment). MONTHLY, he had to report to immigration in Newark. When, after 6 months of our hosting him, Garrick wanted his own place and found an apartment in Belleville (where Uncle Junior on The Sopranos lived), he had to get PERMISSION from the INS to change his residence. Whatever happened to that system?
Years of neglect and deliberate subversion of our border security and immigration law, such as it is what with two Kennedy laws 1966 and 1986 (when amnesty was granted but NEVER AGAIN), and leftist obfuscation and allegations of racism and bigotry (the trump card of the lame-now finally losing its power) have resulted in a border overrun by criminals, traffickers in human slavery, drug cartels, even incursions by Mexican helicopters and federales, all of which the federal government (under both Bushs, Clinton, and the current occupier of the White House) has devised and perpetrated against the legal and lawful citizens of America who must carry the costs and bear the depredations of illegals, seemingly without our OWN relief, would that DHS could grant it.
Florida is now supposedly considering its own AZ SB 1070, only "stronger." I am sure sure what that means, and I would not for the life of me, detain or torment people visiting here or legally here or their families and children, but each and every state should have its own AZ law. Let the little o sue and waste taxes and time. Unless we wish to be overrun with maybe a 10% illegal and unassimilatable population, we have to protect ourselves, our history, and our culture.