The Arizona Law contains some chapters that are discriminatory especially against immigrants. I would like to assert this given a recent ruling by a federal judge. The judge made the ruling in July 2010 temporarily blocking “provisions requiring Arizona police to make a ‘reasonable attempt’ to determine the immigration status of people they stop and to detain those suspected of being in the U. S. illegally” (Rowley 9). The federal judge argued in his ruling that “Arizona’s law usurped exclusively federal enforcement powers” (Rowley 10).
This clearly indicates that the immigration laws of the State of Arizona can not get any worse. They are so discriminatory that they give the police powers to arrest people at will without considering the law that says all men were created equal. It is not justified in any law to arrest someone on account of their race or ethnicity without having committed any offence punishable in law. The lawsuit had been filed by the Justice Department of the United Stares upon request of president Barrack Obama challenging these laws which have clearly been overtaken by events.
The men and women who drafted these insensitive laws must have been extremists who can not hear of anything foreign. These people have been so blinded by extremist views and ideologies that they can not recognize that these immigrants too have their contribution to the economy of the U. S. The changing times require that people also change so as to keep in pace and as such the State of Arizona can not afford to be dragged behind by unrealistic laws that reduce some people to lesser beings and give them lesser rights merely because they do not originate from the U.
S. Personally, I support the ruling of the judge despite the fact that it left a bitter taste in some supremacist’s mouth, but it is all clear for everyone to see that the judge did it in the best interest of the country without necessarily considering who it hurt and who it did not. Rowley (9) further states that “Obama and Justice Department lawyers were concerned about the law creating a patchwork of immigration policies in the country” pp.
6-8. This was purely a legal argument meant to benefit the good people of the U. S. without any regard to the old Democrats versus Republicans politics that that some anti-change character would like to introduce into the good cause to divert attention and possibly derail this effort of bringing some sense of equality altogether. Some people deliberately tried to convince others that the riling was politically influenced but they were ignored