One concern that opponents of Arizona's SB 1070 have is that, once the law goes into effect next month, other police forces will adopt the tactics employed by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. After all, this bill is Arpaio's wet dream — a policy that gives him unlimited authority to do what he's always wanted: detain whomever he wants. Arizona Congressman Raul Grijalva, one of the most outspoken critics of the "papers please" legislation, held a hearing in Washington DC two weeks ago where he warned of this very thing.
In particular, many people fear the Sheriff's infamous "sweeps" may become the norm. To no one's surprise, Arpaio has already announced that when SB 1070 becomes effective on July 29, he'll celebrate with a massive sweep. If you're not familiar with the term, just think of a SWAT team of deputies — sometimes masked, sometimes armed — surrounding and sealing off a business or neighborhood, then moving through the area demanding papers from anyone who looks "suspicious." And you know what that means. Hint: it has nothing to do with their shoes.
Typically, sweeps take place in neighborhoods that are predominantly Hispanic, or Arpaio will target businesses that depend on cheap labor: car washes, fast food restaurants, warehouses. Of course, the Sheriff's public relations office (yes, he has one) always tells the media when and where sweeps will occur, so Joe can keep his mug in front of the camera — blabbering about the good job he's doing protecting us from the kid who just vacuumed your car or sold you a Big Mac.
Here is a YouTube video of the tough guy's recent sweep at Burlington Coat Factory, which is located in a large mall in Tempe. The action succeeded in shutting down a business for a half-day, scaring the heck out of employees and shoppers, and netting three immigrants (who had jobs and were going to school).
Human rights advocates have complained for years that the sweeps are an unconstitutional police state action and, furthermore, they're costly, ineffective, and create poor relations between communities and law officers (just think if it happened in your neighborhood). A story in today's Arizona Republic, which for years celebrated "the toughest Sheriff in America," lends credence to the critics' arguments. Happily, the article begins by saying that most other police forces in the state (and many do not support SB 1070) are not likely to adopt Arpaio's tactics:
Though few law-enforcement officials will speak publicly about it, their records suggest an unwillingness to follow Arpaio's lead. No other Arizona law-enforcement agencies have taken the same initiative Arpaio has in launching immigration sweeps.
Part of the reason is because there is no clear data demonstrating the crime-fighting effectiveness of such policies. While it succeeds in locating illegal immigrants, its effectiveness in combating major crimes is questionable, and there are concerns that such sweeps draw resources away from activities that do combat major crimes.
That's been a major concern in the immigration wars for years — that focusing on arresting burger flippers and car washers drains scarce resources from battling major crimes. Phoenix has, for example, one of the nation's highest kidnapping rates, but for every story about that crime on the news, you'll see 100 or more about Joe Arpaio arresting day laborers in the Home Depot parking lot.
Since 2008, when Arpaio started the program, there have been 15 major sweep operations. The newspaper's article notes that 932 people have been arrested, of which 708 were here without papers.
[T]he majority of offenders were booked for relatively minor offenses, an Arizona Republic review of crime data shows. For example, an April sweep caught 93 people, most of whom were snared either solely for immigration violations or for minor offenses. Only two violent offenders were arrested.
Do the math. Arizona was already swirling in an economic toilet before SB 1070, forcing the closure of many state programs. Now, we are looking at an additional loss of hundreds of millions of dollars because of the boycotts. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face! Beyond the money, another concern is that legal residents are not only harassed but caught up in the police net.
Sergio Martinez-Villaman claims that happened to him in a June 2008 crime-suppression operation in Mesa. Deputies stopped Martinez-Villaman for failing to use a turn signal, according to the sheriff's records. They arrested him after they say he failed to show identification. Before he was arrested, Martinez-Villaman, a Mexican citizen living legally in the U.S., claims he gave the arresting deputy various documents, including an Arizona ID card, proof of insurance, a passport and a visa, according to court records. Martinez-Villaman was jailed and held for 13 days when he could not pay bond, court records say.
He's suing, as have many. With tactics like these, it's no surprise Joe Arpaio has cost the taxpayers of Maricopa County more in lawsuits than the next ten large county sheriffs combined. To date, his illegal arrests and inhumane treatment, including torture and death, have cost more than $41 million. And here the Republicans who keep electing Arpaio and cheer SB 1070 say they're "fiscal conservatives." Evidently not where their racism is concerned. With SB 1070, the number of lawsuits is likely to skyrocket. At Congressman Grijalva's recent hearing, the group Puente said they are already receiving five calls per day from residents about racial profiling, even before the law has gone into effect.
Governor Jan Brewer and Joe Apriao say, of course, that racial profiling will not occur, because deputies are supposed to have "reasonable suspicion" before detaining anyone, but what the heck does that mean? Pretty much whatever you want, it seems. Emails between lawyer Kris Kobach of the hate group FAIR (who literally wrote SB 1070) and Senator Russell Pearce, the gasbag-in-chief when it comes to immigrant bashing, show they've really stretched the "reasonable suspicion" definition. New Times uncovered this email from Kobach to Pearce as SB 1070 was being amended:
When we drop out "lawful contact" and replace it with "a stop, detention, or rest, in the enforcement a violation of any title or section of the Arizona code" we need to add "or any county or municipal ordinance." This will allow police to use violations of property codes (ie, cars on blocks in the yard) or rental codes (too many occupants of a rental accommodation) to initiate queries as well.
So, a car on blocks or an apartment with a lot of people are sufficient causes. Probably a Mexican-looking kid mowing the lawn will do too. Any wonder critics are concerned about this slippery slope? All of this is on top of the fact that no one really knows how to implement SB 1070: its terms are too vague; there doesn't seem to be agreement between federal, state, and city law enforcement agencies; and there's no money for most local police forces to handle their current assignments, let alone saddle them with being immigration cops.
The good news is that the walls of Arpaio's fortress are cracking. Not only are other police officials ignoring the blowhard, but every Arpaio-wannabee candidate he backed in the recent primaries lost, several elected officials and judges have filed lawsuits against him, we await the outcome of a federal grand jury investigation into his abuse of powers, and just yesterday another front page story in Sunday's Arizona Republic challenged his rhetoric that we are being "invaded" from the south: border crime is down, overall crime in Arizona is down, and the borders are more secure than they have ever been.
Maybe, just maybe, if people examine the facts instead of falling for the hyperbole we can enact genuine immigration reform — you know, the kind John McCain used to support.