Since the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was enacted during the Presidency of Ronald Reagan, the Federal Government has proven to be unwilling or unable to enforce immigration law. Recently up to ten states have been considering laws that would make it easier for them to assist the Feds in enforcing Federal laws. The first state to take up this effort has passed and signed a bill requiring police officers within the state, when investigating a crime or misdemeanor such as traffic violations, domestic disturbances, etc., to also consider the possibility the suspect may be in violation of Federal immigration law.
If there is ample reason to believe the person may be in the country illegally, the officer is to request proof of citizenship. If the suspect is unable to produce the proper documents, the officer is required to take the individual into custody for further investigation. If unable to show proof of immigration status, the suspect is detained and turned over to Federal Authorities for follow-up.
Government agencies protect their turf with only slightly less vigor that the average street gang or drug cartel, so it is only natural to expect that Fed officials would resent the state’s encroachment on their authority and the implied suggestion that they were incapable of enforcing their own laws. The reaction to the state’s actions goes much further, however.
Many localities like the District of Columbia and Cook County, Illinois have determined to stop doing business with states that have the audacity to enforce federal law. Pressure has also been directed to business and professional groups such as the Chicago Bar Association to cancel scheduled conferences and conventions planned for the state or states that follow through with their plans to enforce the law. Typical of the reactions around the Country are those of the School Board of Highland Park, Illinois.
The girl’s basketball team in the local high school recently won its first championship in 26 years. The team has been selling cookies and engaging in other fund-raising efforts for months in order to finance their trip to a tournament in the state that has decided to enforce federal immigration law. On Monday, their coach broke the news that they would not be attending the tournament. District 113 Assistant Superintendent Susan Hebson explained that such a trip “would not be aligned with our beliefs and values”. Since the state law in question only requires the local police to assist in enforcing federal law, it is obvious that the protests are not really directed at the state’s police forces but to the underlying federal immigration law.
This brings up the question of who is protesting and why? First are the socialists. That is no surprise because a basic tenet of international socialism is unfettered immigration among borderless states. Second is the opposition from immigrant activist groups. This too, is to be expected. The third and most important opposition is coming from the Democratic Party. The President has vowed to challenge the legality of the state law and several Democrat Congressmen have called for national boycotts of the state involved. Many of America’s cities controlled by the Democratic Party have been “sanctuary cities” for decades, refusing to cooperate in any way with the enforcement of immigration laws.
Why would the majority party in any Republic be against the enforcement of law, since the first principle of a republican form of government is “the rule of law”? The answer to this question has to do with who the Democratic Party is. For the past hundred years it has been slowly and incrementally taken over by the progressive (American socialists) movement. Its continuance in power is dependent on its ability to obfuscate the Constitution and the law. This is accomplished in part, by encouraging class and race divisions among the people. It is in the Party’s interest to make it appear that enforcement of immigration laws is a matter of race and not of law.
Rather than view the American people as a whole, the Democrat party sees them as voting blocks to be manipulated and used as a means of increasing and holding power. Hispanics make up one of the largest Democrat voting blocks. The majority of those violating immigration laws are Hispanic. Furthermore, a large part of these do not speak English or understand the basic principles of the American form of government. Therefore, they are easily manipulated, politically, by the Democrat Party. This group provides the Democrat Party with its best opportunity of holding on to power after the 2010 and 2012 elections. The party is counting on wholesale voter fraud in the upcoming elections, through the opportunities afforded by “motor voter” laws, absentee voting and early voting, aided by groups like La Raza and ACORN or its successor.
The exaggerated concern over such issues as “racial profiling” and constitutional questions about states’ authority to enforce federal laws are nothing more than “red herrings” to cover up the real reason for their concern, a backlash from the electorate in response to the increased violations of the Constitution on the part of government.