CP Politics

Thursday, Apr 24, 2014

SCOTUS Arizona Immigration Law Decision: Who Wins? (Pt. 2)

July 3, 2012|6:39 am

The Christian Post is pleased to introduce "The Iron Room," a forum featuring analysis from an exciting new panel of CP commentators on areas where the Christian faith and public policy intersect. The name of the new CP political forum is inspired by Proverbs 27:17: "As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another."

Our second installment covers the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision on Arizona's controversial immigration law. This is the second of a two-part series.

Score 1 for the rule of law in America.

The U.S. Supreme Court's divided decision in Arizona vs. the United States represents a small victory for those concerned about public safety and the need for sovereign nations to maintain control over their borders. The provision allows police officers to check the immigration status of persons suspected of committing crimes. Police officers can ask the individuals they stop for other purposes to show proper documentation to prove that they are in the country legally.

Although the police can report unauthorized persons to the Department of Homeland Security, there is absolutely no guarantee that this will result in the removal of detained persons. In fact, it is more likely that the only people to get in trouble will be the law enforcement personnel who make the report. These individuals will face accusations of racial profiling even when their suspicions were justified.

We have an unfortunate situation in this country. Individuals in the highest echelons of power are disrespecting the Constitution. The President sets the tone for the entire nation. If the President disrespects the Constitution and the rule of law, it sends a signal and sets an example for those who look to him for guidance. Especially troubling are the immigrants we see interviewed who openly flaunt their illegal presence in this country and act as if they are entitled to social welfare benefits, jobs, and education at public expense. By not enforcing our laws, we have taught them how to treat us.

I recently heard an eye-witness account of two illegal aliens from Mexico who were caught shoplifting in a Wal-Mart in Greenfield, California. When they were apprehended by the security guard, one of the men said: "you can't arrest me, I have protected status." The shoplifters left the store without being arrested. This incident took place in a sanctuary city where illegal aliens operate by their own rules while law enforcement personnel turn a blind eye to the violence and chaos that ensue.

What many Americans see as mercy, justice, and kindness have harmed us and the illegal aliens among us. We have created an environment that fails legal immigrants and law-abiding citizens who can no longer expect protection from their government. Meanwhile, the people who have entered our country without authorization are protected from the legal consequences of many of the crimes they inflict on our communities.

Unfortunately, we have created a situation where people who have fled the lawlessness of other nations have used our kindness against us. True mercy requires immigrants to respect the laws and cultures of the nations they enter. We contribute to the destruction of our nation and we contribute to the delinquency of law-breakers when we settle for anything less than demanding the best from unauthorized migrants who enter our country for a variety of reasons that include the search for better lifestyles and the escape from corruption and vice.

We are foolish if we fail to acknowledge that scattered among the newcomers are plenty of people who seek to do us harm.

Carol Swain if professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt University. Her research interests include immigration and race relations. Her most recent book is Be the People: A Call to Reclaim America's Faith and Promise.
Source URL : http://www.christianpost.com/news/scotus-arizona-immigration-law-decision-who-wins-pt-2-77488/