ARIZONA IMMIGRATION LAW
There has been quite a bit of interest in the
recent immigration law, Arizona SB 1070.
How should a Christian analyze such a law? First, any Christian should first go to Scriptures to see if
there is any guidance. And, yes there is. In fact, on this issue there is quite a
bit of guidance. On the issues of
aliens the Scriptures are voluminous and clear. I believe the best and clearest Scripture on the matter
comes from Leviticus:
Leviticus 19: 33-34:
When an alien
lives with you in your land, do not mistreat him. The alien living with you must be treated as one of your
native-born. Love him as yourself,
for you were aliens in Egypt. I am
the Lord your God.
Also, I believe these words from the Book of James are helpful when analyzing this law from a Christian perspective.
My brothers, as
believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, do not show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting
wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also
comes in. If you show special
attention to a man wearing fine clothes and say, Here is a good seat for you,
but say to the poor man. You
stand there or Sit on the floor by my feet, have you not discriminated among yourselves and become
judges with evil thoughts?
Listen, my dear
brothers: Has not God chosen those
who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the
kingdom he promised those who love him?
But you have insulted the poor.
Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are
slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
If you really keep
the royal law found in Scripture, Love your neighbor as yourself, you are
doing right. But if you show
favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.
Keep the Scriptures in mind. Step Two is to actually reading the civil law. Reading
some columnist or ideologues writing is not reading the text of the law, It took me about five minutes to find
the actual text of the law on the internet. It is about 17 pages of legalese and may take some effort to
read it. In any event, these are
some crucial aspects of this law that I have summarized:
1). All agencies, officials of this state, country, city, town, or any other political subdivision must enforce federal immigration law to the full extent of federal law. (AZ SB 11-501(a))
My Comment: Park rangers, public sanitation workers, animal enforcement workers, school teachers, etc. must enforce federal immigration laws, not just the police.
2), Any
person covered in section 1 above must make a reasonable attempt to determine
the immigration status of a person upon any lawful contact with that person
where reasonable suspicion exists that a person is an alien that is unlawfully
present in the United States. (AZ SB 11-501(B))
My Comment: People have argued about what would constitute reasonable suspicion. Proponents of the law have stated that police officers are sufficiently professional that they could do this without racial profiling. Even if that were possible, is that true about all other public employees? This law requires all public employees to enforce federal immigration laws.
Frankly, it is hard to see how this could be done without making some judgment on clothes, accent, cars, skin color, and physical appearance.
3). Any
Person may bring an action in Superior Court to challenge any public official
or agency concerning its enforcement of this law. (AZ SB 11-501(F))
My Comment: This is unusual. Usually public workers and individuals are shielded from complaints about particular policies and law enforcement. Although law enforcement officers are specifically indeminified in Section I of this title, this is not true of any other public employee, i.e. public social workers or teachers. This law is a license for harassment.
4). Any
alien without sufficient documentation will not only be guilty of a violation
of any federal immigration law, but is also guilty of trespass on any private
or public land in the state. (AZ SB 13-1509(A))
My Comment: This clearly violates the Common Law Right of Sanctuary and infringes upon the churchs rights that have its existence all the way back to England. This established a secular religion in place of the churchs rights to sacred law or equity law that is established in our country. Also, you as a private person have no right to give an undocumented person a right to be on your private property. Trespass has always been the province of the person who has the right to control the property. In other words, both a churchs rights and a private persons rights are violated.
Let me give a hypothetical example. A felon flees to your private property. You shelter them willingly and knowingly. You could be charged with obstruction of justice, sheltering a felon, conspiracy after the fact, or any number of charges. However, the felon would not be charged with trespassing on your property. Why? You gave your permission. Private Property Rights and the Right to Sanctuary have been violated.
5). It is
a Class 1 Misdemeanor to pick up any one to work or enter a car to work if it
is deemed to impede traffic. This
is true whether or not the person is undocumented or not. (AZ
SB 13-2928(A),(B))
My Comment; An honest days work for an honest days pay seems to not be an American value any more. Christians should read Matthew 20: 1-16. Day Laborers are common throughout the world. When we are too cool for such work and such labor practice, then perhaps we need to be humbled. I am sure the standard of impeding traffic is already covered by many Arizona traffic regulations. It is hard to believe the intention is anything other than what it first appears, an attempt to harass poor day laborers.
In summary, a Christian should be guided by Biblical principles. First, see what the Bible has said about the general topic. Then, see whether the law fits those principals. In this case, it is hard for me to see how this law promotes loving the alien as myself (Leviticus 19: 34) or does not promote being a respecter of persons, which is prohibited in James 2. Our response is predicated by biblical principles, not political biases