Creating a police state

In your recent editorial about Arizona's new immigration law, SB1070, the Review-Journal editors paint those who oppose the legislation as engaging in "hysteria."

Truth be told, though, it is those who would trade our most cherished freedoms and submit to the idea of a police state who have let hysteria reign over reason -- and the Constitution.

While the frustration with our immigration laws -- which neither keep our borders secure nor protect due process -- is understandable, we cannot let concerns about immigration destroy what it means to be the United States of America.

The main problem with Arizona's new law is really quite simple: SB1070 allows for racial discrimination. Peace officers in Arizona can stop, question and detain individuals they "reasonably suspect" are not in the United States legally -- and they must investigate status when already interacting with members of the public.

But what does "reasonable suspicion" mean, exactly? Other than racial and ethnic indicators, it is hard to imagine what police would base stops on. How do we know whether someone is here illegally? Some such people speak Spanish, but so do many citizens. And Canadians and Irish people who are here illegally do not resemble the stereotype of an illegal alien -- but their immigration violations should not be treated differently.

The concern that SB1070 will lead to racial profiling is not a "politically correct" or "hysterical" reaction, as the Review-Journal suggests. It is reality.

Experience across the country with similar laws -- such as the 287(g) program operating in Las Vegas -- already shows that racial profiling happens when local law enforcement is tasked with the complicated job of immigration enforcement. While race cannot be a sole factor for a stop, the Arizona law explicitly allows it to be part of the calculus. Whether it's a sole factor or one of a few, discriminating based on race runs counter to the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause – and the American ideal of equality.

Moreover, SB1070 does not just, as a recent Review-Journal editorial suggests, apply to illegal immigrants. It affects everyone living in or visiting Arizona by drastically expanding police powers. It violates the Fourth Amendment's protections and runs against the fundamental principle that you have the right to be left alone by the government unless officers have an objectively reasonable belief you are breaking the law. The law grants officers exactly the kind of unbridled, unchecked government discretion and warrantless ability to stop people without clear standards that the Review-Journal has spoken out against for years.

Effectively turning Arizona into a police state, SB1070 turns the principle of innocent until proven guilty on its head by requiring people to have their papers on them at all times to prove that they are in this country legally. One might argue that only those who are illegal will need to worry about this, but again, how can you tell? Do you "know" illegal immigrants by looking at them?

Sounds like racial profiling, and so we're back where we started.

On a more practical level, SB1070 will be very expensive. Enforcing immigration laws is costly and complicated at a time when local governments are already at their limits. These kinds of efforts burden local law enforcement budgets and distract police officers from focusing on what should be their primary concern -- addressing violent crime and keeping the community safe. A county in Virginia passed a similar ordinance but delayed enforcement when it turned out that implementation would cost $14.2 million over just five years.

The law will also lead to costly litigation from all sides. The ACLU, along with other civil rights groups, has announced plans to file suit. Other lawsuits are also likely to arise -- and each one will cost taxpayer money. In Chandler, Ariz., more than $400,000 was paid in settlement in a case where racial profiling was the basis of a raid.

Further, Arizona citizens will be able to bring lawsuits to effectuate enforcement, so fines and damages could abound from those who support the law, too. One thing is certain: a legal mess is in the works.

Policing our borders and enforcing immigration laws is a job that belongs to the federal government. Instead of giving states carte blanche to pass whatever laws they see fit -- at the cost of American principles -- the immigration problems we face demand comprehensive reform. Such reform must secure our borders and solve immigration problems in a constitutional manner that respects all Americans' right to privacy.

Arizona's new law sacrifices the very principles that we as a nation stand for.  Civil liberties matter to Nevadans, and a bill such as Arizona's would not make sense for our state. Indeed, the impact on tourism could be devastating; calls for boycotts of Arizona already abound. Does Nevada want to send a message that people who "look foreign" aren't welcome here? Do tourists want to visit a place where they can be required to "show their papers" just for being on the street? Do any of us want to live in a place like that?

It's a frightening prospect -- enough to make someone hysterical.

Maggie McLetchie is the ACLU of Nevada's interim southern program director.