Friday, March 13, 2009

Democrats in Congress trying to intimidate Arizona Sheriff for enforcing immigration laws

The Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, Joe Arpaio, has "dozens of officers under his command" who have been trained by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency and partnered with them to enforce immigration laws.  And, seemingly unlike the federal government, the Maricopa County has actually been enforcing those laws.  As of last August, in the course of 18 months "nearly 2,300" undocumented aliens had been arrested as the result of specific programs directed at illegal immigration and human smuggling on the county's roads.  In addition, 16,000 -- 16,000! -- prisoners in Maricopa County jails "were determined to be illegal aliens."  Now, they'll be deported after serving their time, thanks to the Sheriff's efforts.

But is Maricopa County getting the big pat on the back that they deserve?  Nope.  The sheriff and his deputies are being investigated by the Justice Department at the urging of liberal Democrats John Conyers, Jerrold Nadler, Zoe Lofgren, and Robert Scott.  ACORN is lending its support to the investigation with a petition drive and rallies.  (Link to story here.)

The investigation centers on "patterns or practices of discriminatory police practices and unconstitutional searches and seizures conducted by the MCSO [Maricopa County Sheriff's Office], and on the allegations of national origin discrimination."

Now, don't get me wrong.  The Sheriff's Department should follow the law and the constitution.  If they're failing to do so, they should be stopped.  

But, this sure smells like intimidation to me.  It is a signal to law enforcement officials everywhere, including those in the Missouri Highway Patrol, to turn the other way to illegal immigration or face investigation yourself.

Haven't we turned the other way for too long?


MP said...

I'm sure there wasn't a breach in the constitution by this law abiding sherif. Good for him!! The constitution is for US citizens, not criminals from other countries. The Dems will do anything to get more votes.

Dameon said...

That's where are National Guard should be posted - shoulder to shoulder on the Mexican border.

thetimman said...

The blogger obviously knows nothing about immigration law...

nah, this is thuggery, plain and simple.

St. Louis Conservative said...

National Guard? Why not go one step further . . . pull back some of the troops we station around the world for no particular reason and station them on the border?

Dameon said...

SLC, I agree with you there.

However, constitutionally, it is the National Guards job to protect the homeland. I believe there are safeguards in place that prevent federal troops from being "deployed" within the boarders of the United States, not that I necessarily agree with that.

If the NG was not deployed in foreign lands (where they shouldn't be), there would be plenty of man power for them to protect the borders.

If it were me, I'd pull them all home - go back to being isolationists. I'd ramp up to a 1M standing arm (which you could due through recruiting *if* they weren't being deployed in a war zone on foreign lands) and take a strickly defensive posture. The money being saved by not having troops deployed around the world could be used for the expansion and necessary equipment.

Rotate 200,000 men at a time on the Mexican boarder (that's about 50 foot of border per soldier) and the problem is solved. No more guns, drugs, or illigals crossing unhindered.

St. Louis Conservative said...

While not one for isolationism, I think we're close to agreement Dameon.