The American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona announced Monday that it will fight a recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals saying the “show me your papers” portion of SB 1070 is good to go. In September, a judge said the ACLU of Arizona had failed to prove police racial profile Latinos when questioning a person’s immigration status.
That section green lights officers to ask an individual who is pulled over or arrested to show proof of residency or citizenship when there is reasonable suspicion the person in question is in the country undocumented. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court killed three out of four challenged provisions in SB 1070—the fourth being the “show me your papers” provision.
Also last month, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton issued an order permanently blocking SB 1070’s “punitive and unconstitutional provisions that aimed to suppress the free speech rights of the day laborers who live and work in Arizona.” But advocates were disappointed that she, again, let stand what they refer to as the law’s “most harmful provision.”
From an ACLU of Arizona press release:
Section 2(B), which requires police to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop, detain or arrest if “reasonable suspicion exists that the person … is unlawfully present in the United States,” and Section 2(D), which authorizes police to transfer people to the custody of federal immigration officials.
“While many aspects of Arizona’s anti-immigrant law have been dismantled over the course of a 5-year legal battle, the most recent district court ruling left some of the law’s most shameful and discriminatory provisions intact,” said a statement to the media by Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the plaintiffs’ counsel in the suit. “We are confident that ruling will be overturned on appeal and will work alongside our courageous plaintiffs to move Arizona towards policies that are inclusive and humane—not fueled by hatred and racial animus.”
Since the statute went into effect in 2010, immigration rights advocates and allies have constantly protested what they see as a law that promotes racial profiling and discrimination against minorities.
Locally, advocacy groups have expressed their discontent for how the Tucson Police Department enforced SB 1070.
It became too common to hear about undocumented men and women apprehended by the Border Patrol over a minor traffic violation. Although, since the beginning TPD Chief Roberto Villaseñor expressed displeasure with the law, he’d repeatedly reminded the community that it was his job to enforce it.
“You get the good and you get the bad. That is my job to enforce the law. For people to tell me to ignore it, it was not realistic,” he told the Tucson Weekly in March, after the department announced it would scale-back its enforcement of the “show me your papers” provision. “But there is some tension that could be relieved by getting us out of the immigration enforcement aspect. It helps heal the relationship between the department and the community because there is a lot of mistrust, a lot of frustration on why are local police involved with federal immigration enforcement … civil immigration enforcement. This is a way to begin to heal that grief between the department and the community.”
Earlier this year, the department adjusted its SB 1070 policies. In December, Villaseñor announced the police would not get involved with immigration enforcement unless those detained have felonies on their records, are affiliated with a gang, are identified as terrorists, or pose a threat to national security. The changes better matched the Department of Homeland Security’s criteria, and President Barack Obama’s 2014 immigration action, which reinforced that the government should focus on deporting criminals.
This article appears in Oct 1-7, 2015.

The Ninth Circus Court and they still don’t like it? We have given AZ drivers licenses to illegals that have not bought insurance. I would bet DMV made the title changes into their names, so you better be careful because there will be some more papers they can’t show you.
Anxiously awaiting a new American President.
I have lived (for extended periods_ in Germany, Japan,and Panama. I have travelled to over 25 other countries over the years. I always had to “show my papers” to the authorities.
If I was stopped by the police in any state in the US. I would have to show my papers.
What is the problem?
Remember when the ACLU represented Americans?
A nation without borders is not a nation.
The ACLU should be forced to take American out of their name. I for Illegal is more appropriate.
The ACLU should be forced to take American out of their name. I for Illegal is more appropriate.
Can you over ride a LAW with a POLICY?
This is the law they wish to ignore:
The removal of an alien who is inadmissible because the individual does not possess valid entry documents or is inadmissible for fraud or misrepresentation of material fact (forged government documents like SS numbers) (INA § 235(b)(1)(B)(iii)). The alien may be removed without a hearing before an immigration court.” pg 2, Box 1, right side.
This is the other LAW they are trying to say doesn’t exist: 8 U.S. Code § 1324 – Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
It is illegal to knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;
(i) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i) or (v)(I) or in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), or (iv) in which the offense was done for the purpose of commercial advantage or private financial gain, be fined under title 18, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both;
Most illegals are parasites, have absolutely no desire to be Americans, and really don’t like us. They simply want to take as much as they can.