I am a New Zealand Citizen, but I was born in the Philippines to a Filipino father, and a Half-Vietnamese Mother. Three years ago, I moved to the US as a permanent resident. So far, I'm on track to obtain citizenship, if I decide to and when I'm eligible.
Even now, my accent is still strange to some, and I often have to repeat my first name before people get it right.
"It's Jayo"
"Oh, James"
"No, Jayo. J. A. Y. O."
"Jayl?"
"No, Jayo"
"Oh, Jay. Hi Jay"
"Fine. Yes, it's Jay"
So let's say that one day, I went to Arizona (possibly next month, after the SB1070 passes). I check into a hotel, and think to myself "what a lovely state, I think I'll go for a drive". My rental car is taking a bit of getting used to, and I'm a fairly new driver, but I get by.
On the road, I'm pulled over by a Law Enforcement Officer. Lawfully, I stop, because this is considered a lawful stop. It turns out my tail light's out, and the officer pulled me over, lawfully, to inform me.
Under SB1070, since the officer has lawfully stopped me, he or she can also ask me for documentation. The officer is struck with reasonable suspicion, as the law entitles him to do so, so he asks me for documentation of my lawfully being in the United States. I have a green card, and by law I'm already required to carry the green card with me at all times. So I present this documentation. I myself could have reasonable suspicion that his reasonable suspicion could be based on my skin color, or my accent, or the way I dress, but I don't like to make unfounded assumptions of people. On top of this, the bill prohibits racial profiling, so any suspicions of racially motivated reasonable suspicions would be unreasonable on my part. The officer's reasonable suspicion is put at ease by my presentation of my document, so I'm released with a warning that I need my tail light fixed. I drive to Hertz and yell at them.
This is how SB1070 would work ideally, and proponents of the bill imagine that this is how it would work. If someone is not able to provide documentation, or does not have the documentation to begin with, then steps can be made to fine them, as the law states, on the grounds of being undocumented. But the above situation does not take into consideration a number of factors. The term "reasonable suspicion" is poor and vague wording to be placing in a bill, especially because it concerns a specific responsibility placed on Law Enfrocement Officers.
I'm a college student. Though I do not have a fake ID, I know how easy it is to get one, and I know how prolific the use of fake identification is in the country, let alone Providence College. Law Enforcement Officers are not ignorant, they know this. So if they have reasonable suspicion that documentation provided is counterfeit, then they have probable cause to continue their reasonable suspicion on an individual they have lawfully stopped.
So let's go back. I provide my resident alien card, but the officer, knowledgeable of fake IDs and their proliferation for college students, has reasonable suspicion that it could be fake. The only thing to confirm its legitimacy is by checking the alien number. So he takes my card, and leaves me while he makes a call to confirm that it is, in fact, a real card. But it's a fake ID, and a fake ID can easily place information of documented individuals in the spaces provided. So even though the officer returns stating that the alien number was given clearance, the officer may continue his reasonable suspicion. It's not helping that he doesn't know half the words I'm saying. I have a tendency to mutter, and my accent is problematic. His reasonable suspicion is tingling. Because he can't confirm if I am or am not a documented individual, he has the power to detain me or fine me on the spot. I have reasonable suspicion that this guy's an ass hole.
But the law makes provisions to prohibit racial profiling. So the law enforcement officer is liable. So let's go back. Let's say I did have a fake green card, or I didn't, it doesn't matter. Even if the officer has reasonable suspicion that I have a fake green card, he will be liable if he wrongfully accuses me of being undocumented. Avoiding the trouble and liability of the situation, he lets me go, not knowing for sure if I really am undocumented. The law places huge, added responsibility of law enforcement officers, and this is why some officers are actually involved in filing suits against the bill.
But even before this, let's say I was white. Now, I never like to make this type of comparison, because I feel that oversensitivity, political correctness, and tit-for-tat blame-games are part of the larger issue of race. But I make the exception in this case. So let's say I was white, and I was stopped according to the situation above. Because I am white, reasonable suspicion on the officer's behalf will not be afoot. In fact, the officer skips through the reasonable-suspicion-show-me-your-papers hubub and simply warns me that my tail light's out and I should get it fixed. End of scenario.
Yes, I know, the law prohibits racial profiling, but make no mistake, the vagueness of the term "reasonable suspicion" puts nothing but racial profiling into the hands of law enforcement officers, willingly or not. Reasonable suspicion will be based on one's skin color, and one's accent, and one's clothing. What else is there to be reasonably suspicious about?
Another scenario: my green card expired a month ago, so I applied for a new one. But because the way the system works, it takes a number of months for this to be processed, and I won't receive my new card for a while. Meanwhile, I'm forced to carry around my expired green card. This puts me at even more risk of reasonable suspicion, because not only am I brown, but I'm carrying around an expired green card.
Another scenario: let's say I'm a citizen, but my accent is still pretty stubborn and refuses to blend smoothly enough. As a citizen, I'm not required to carry around a citizenship card. One does not exist. Let's say I was put into that situation. I'm not able to provide the documents you're looking for, officer, because I am a citizen. What then?
I agree that we need immigration reform, and I agree that the federal government is largely at fault for not working on immigration reform sooner. Because of it, Arizona was forced to scratch up this shoddy bill. But there are real solutions that are not aggravating the problem. It's easy to scapegoat crime on undocumented individuals (even though crime in Arizona has actually steadily declined in recent years). It is easier still to put a law behind scapegoating.
The above reasons are why I'm so passionately against the Arizona bill. People often misunderstand my opposition to the bill, saying that I'm supporting illegal immigration, and they are sorely mistaken. Just because the bill has potential, intended consequences for undocumented individuals, does not mean that the consequences for documented individuals are justified.
Say there is a pack of pedophiles in a room full of fourth graders. You can't justifiably bomb the entire room just because you have the optimized situation to be rid of this pack of pedophiles.