Some major aspects of Arizona’s immigration law are Keynesian and left wing, and criticisms of these aspects are quite consistent with conservative values. I focus here on three of those values: one, the sovereignty of freedom; two, the sovereignty of the individual over the collective; three, the opposition to big government power.
S. B. 1070, in some key ways, falls short of these three principles.
One, the sovereignty of freedom: Often we are asked to choose between freedom and safety–and many understandably choose safety. But in S. B. 1070 precious little safety is provided in reality. If in enforcing this law there must be “lawful contact” with possible illegal immigrants and “the most likely context where this law would come into play is a traffic stop,” very few of Arizona’s 500,000 illegal immigrants will be caught. But freedoms of many innocent people will be intruded upon. Of this, there is no doubt.
Two, the sovereignty of the individual over the collective: John Stuart Mill wisely observed the “tyranny of the prevailing opinion” throughout times in history. When, for example, the American majority approved the incarceration of Japanese-Americans during World War II, those minority individuals who opposed such incarceration were called unpatriotic Americans by the majority. Similarly, those in the minority who denounced the majority’s defense of the Salem witch trials were called blasphemous. And those who criticize S. B. 1070 are dismissed by many in overly harsh tones.
Three, the opposition to big government power: S. B. 1070 doesn’t codify abuse, but it does codify the power for government abuse–and that abuse will surely come. Ten years ago in Texas, as a relevant example, a federal judge cited a catalogue of “reasonable suspicions” that police offered in stopping and searching vehicles in South Texas,
–“The vehicle was suspiciously dirty and muddy, or the vehicle was suspiciously squeaky clean.”
–“The vehicle was suspiciously traveling fast or was traveling suspiciously slow (or even was traveling suspiciously at precisely the speed limit).”
–“The (old car, new car, big car, station wagon, camper, oilfield service truck, SUV, van) is the vehicle typically used for smuggling aliens or drugs.”
–“The driver would not make eye contact with the agent, or made eye contact too readily.”
–“The time of day (early morning, mid-morning, later afternoon, early evening, late evening, middle of the night) is when ‘they’ tend to smuggle contraband or aliens.”
–“The passengers were slumped suspiciously in their seats, presumably to avoid detection, or the passengers were sitting suspiciously ramrod erect.”
–“The vehicle was riding suspiciously low (overloaded) or suspiciously high (equipped with heavy-duty shocks and springs).”
Already in Arizona calls are coming into the police station such as: “Officer, there’s a bunch of Mexicans gathered together on the corner. Get over here quick to check their ID papers to see if they are illegal immigrants. They look suspicious.”
When I worked for President Reagan at the United States Information Agency, I watched East German guards, then under the Soviet Bloc, demand identification papers from ordinary East Berlin citizens who innocently approached the American Embassy. Never, ever did I envision that American government officials would demand ID papers from a group standing in a parking lot, ostensibly guilty of nothing but being together and looking suspiciously “like Mexicans.”
S. B. 1070 will catch few illegal immigrants, it will challenge the sovereignty of freedom, it will place the sovereignty of the collective over that of the individual, and it will codify the power of big government abuse. Conservatives–hell, everyone–should rail against this well-intended but, in reality, bad law.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.