http://blog.oup.com/2010/04/democrats/ Academic insights for the thinking world. Wed, 19 Jun 2013 12:31:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 http://blog.oup.com/2010/04/democrats/#comment-157582 Political Junkie Sat, 01 May 2010 17:29:44 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=8669#comment-157582 I just read the best reaction to the immigration law ever on CNN. Awesome! "OK... so a cop's title is "Law Enforcement Officer"... in order to be an "Illegal Immigrant" you have to be breaking the law of the United States of America... why would we not expect our "Law Enforcement Officers" to enforce the law of the United States of America? This is not a racist statement, this is not an anti-immigrant statement, I'm not a tea-partier, Im a slightly left of center gay American whose partner of 8 years is a Canadian. My partner goes through a massive ordeal in order to stay in this country legally, which he does... Im not able to sponsor him for permanent residence, and there is no legal pathway for him to gain permanent residence... so for now we live with renewing his temporary status based on his job and NAFTA, hoping for either an employer willing to sponsor him for permanent residence (a 5 year long, very expensive process) or the repeal/invalidation of DOMA, or the passage of the UAFA bill. He has to prove his legality in this country quite often, and is required to have his passport with proof of his legality on him at all times... I am more a victim of discrimination, as a US Citizen who cannot sponsor my permanent partner for US residence, than these illegal aliens who are breaking the law of the united states" I just read the best reaction to the immigration law ever on CNN. Awesome! “OK… so a cop’s title is “Law Enforcement Officer”… in order to be an “Illegal Immigrant” you have to be breaking the law of the United States of America… why would we not expect our “Law Enforcement Officers” to enforce the law of the United States of America? This is not a racist statement, this is not an anti-immigrant statement, I’m not a tea-partier, Im a slightly left of center gay American whose partner of 8 years is a Canadian. My partner goes through a massive ordeal in order to stay in this country legally, which he does… Im not able to sponsor him for permanent residence, and there is no legal pathway for him to gain permanent residence… so for now we live with renewing his temporary status based on his job and NAFTA, hoping for either an employer willing to sponsor him for permanent residence (a 5 year long, very expensive process) or the repeal/invalidation of DOMA, or the passage of the UAFA bill. He has to prove his legality in this country quite often, and is required to have his passport with proof of his legality on him at all times… I am more a victim of discrimination, as a US Citizen who cannot sponsor my permanent partner for US residence, than these illegal aliens who are breaking the law of the united states”

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2010/04/democrats/#comment-157580 Arizona Citizen Sat, 01 May 2010 16:05:23 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=8669#comment-157580 Arizona lawmakers have approved changes to the state's controversial law cracking down on illegal immigrants. The changes were designed to answer charges made by protesters that it will lead to racial profiling by police. The original law stated police can conduct an immigration status check during any quote "lawful contact," if they have reasonable suspicion a person is an illegal immigrant. It replaces "lawful contact" with "lawful stop, detention or arrest," clarifying police may not stop people without cause. The revised law also removes the word "solely" from the phrase "The attorney general or county attorney shall not investigate complaints that are based solely on race, color or national origin." Read the new <a href="http://www.common-sense-politics.org/2010/05/01/what-is-the-legal-definition-of-lawful-contact/" rel="nofollow">Arizona Immigration Law</a> Arizona lawmakers have approved changes to the state’s controversial law cracking down on illegal immigrants. The changes were designed to answer charges made by protesters that it will lead to racial profiling by police. The original law stated police can conduct an immigration status check during any quote “lawful contact,” if they have reasonable suspicion a person is an illegal immigrant. It replaces “lawful contact” with “lawful stop, detention or arrest,” clarifying police may not stop people without cause. The revised law also removes the word “solely” from the phrase “The attorney general or county attorney shall not investigate complaints that are based solely on race, color or national origin.” Read the new Arizona Immigration Law

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2010/04/democrats/#comment-157510 Funny Guy Fri, 30 Apr 2010 18:30:48 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=8669#comment-157510 This isn't a big step towards profiling. If your involved in a crime officers already ask for identification. As American citizen do you think officers shouldn't be able to ask for identification ever? This isn’t a big step towards profiling. If your involved in a crime officers already ask for identification. As American citizen do you think officers shouldn’t be able to ask for identification ever?

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2010/04/democrats/#comment-157343 Tweets that mention OUPblog » Blog Archive » Democrats Should Look Before they Leap into Immigration Reform -- Topsy.com Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:24:17 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=8669#comment-157343 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Galt's Girl, Rebecca. Rebecca said: Elvin Lim thinks democrats should look before they leap: http://bit.ly/bzaghu [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Galt's Girl, Rebecca. Rebecca said: Elvin Lim thinks democrats should look before they leap: http://bit.ly/bzaghu [...]

]]>