California's racist profiling law.

[thundley4]

834b.  (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully
cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization
Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is
suspected of being present in the United States in violation of
federal immigration laws.
   (b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected
of being present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the
following:
   (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen
of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent
resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time
or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of
immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not
be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and
place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding
documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
   (2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien
who is present in the United States in violation of federal
immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal
justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or
leave the United States.
   (3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United
States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal
status and provide any additional information that may be requested
by any other public entity.
   (c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,
county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with
jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent
or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly
prohibited.

Linky

h/t to HotAir

That part of the California law is almost identical to the Arizona law.

[Boudicca]

Thanks for that, thundley, but never let pesky things like facts get in the way of a good drama for political reasons.

[Ptarmigan]

Now, if they could enforce it............................

[Chris_]

Interesting.  I wonder when the state of California enacted that particular law.

[longview]

lol.  That's just rich. 

[cavegal]

do you think anybody has read it? I mean the lonely left crowd?

[thundley4]

do you think anybody has read it? I mean the lonely left crowd?

I'm sure some have. It's on a lot of conservative blogs, so soon some of the media, (FNC, Rush, Hannity) may pick it up.

[littlelamb]

Very intresting thanks for posting it

[Alpha Mare]

Proposition 187: Text of Proposed Law

PROPOSED LAW

SECTION 1.  Findings and Declaration.

The People of California find and declare as follows:

That they have suffered and are suffering economic hardship
caused by the presence of illegal aliens in this state.

That they have suffered and are suffering personal injury and
damage caused by the criminal conduct of illegal aliens in this
state.

That they have a right to the protection of their government from
any person or persons entering this country unlawfully.

Therefore, the People of California declare their intention to
provide for cooperation between their agencies of state and local
government with the federal government, and to establish a system
of required notification by and between such agencies to prevent
illegal aliens in the United States from receiving benefits or
public services in the State of California.

SECTION 4.  Law Enforcement Cooperation with INS.

Section 834b is added to the Penal Code, to read: (see above)

SECTION 5.  Exclusion of Illegal Aliens from Public Social
Services

SECTION 6.  Exclusion of Illegal Aliens from Publicly Funded
Health Care.
 
SECTION 7.  Exclusion of Illegal Aliens from Public Elementary
and Secondary Schools

SECTION 8.  Exclusion of Illegal Aliens from Public Postsecondary
Educational Institutions.

SECTION 9.  Attorney General Cooperation with the INS.

SECTION 10.  Amendment and Severability.

The statutory provisions contained in this measure may not be
amended by the Legislature except to further its purposes by
statute passed in each house by rollcall vote entered in the
journal, two-thirds of the membership concurring, or by a statute
that becomes effective only when approved by the voters.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:de4XJ2hc9hcJ:www.usc.edu/libraries/archives/ethnicstudies/historicdocs/prop187.txt+ca+penal+code+834+date+adopted&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Passed in 1994 by 59/41%;
 November 20, 1995 - March 13, 1998 The district court issues decisions, ruling that sections 1, and 4 through 9 of Proposition 187 are preempted by the federal PRA, IIRAIRA, and other federal law; 
shot down in 1999-thanks ACLU.

[thundley4]

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:de4XJ2hc9hcJ:www.usc.edu/libraries/archives/ethnicstudies/historicdocs/prop187.txt+ca+penal+code+834+date+adopted&cd=10&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Passed in 1994 by 59/41%;
 November 20, 1995 - March 13, 1998 The district court issues decisions, ruling that sections 1, and 4 through 9 of Proposition 187 are preempted by the federal PRA, IIRAIRA, and other federal law; 
shot down in 1999-thanks ACLU.

The state never appealed?

[Alpha Mare]

[Atty. Gen.]Lungren appealed in 9th District Circuit Court in late 1997. FOR SIX MONTHS LUNGREN TOOK NO ACTION - IT SAT THERE. HE SHOULD HAVE MOVED THE CASE ALONG!

Then came the gubernatorial campaign of 1998, and Gray Davis was elected in November. The appeal process was still sitting silently in court because Lungren had not moved it along.

Davis was elected. The plaintiffs requested "mediation" in the 9th District Court, the court agreed to "mediation".

We know what happened then - Davis (who vehemently opposed Prop 187) "represented" FOR Prop 187. Neither the proponent of Prop 187 nor anyone else who co-sponsored Prop 187 was allowed in the bogus "mediation".

Governor Davis refused to allow the appeal to proceed and dropped the appeal, essentially KILLING PROP 187 against the will of the voters. This after having promised to support the appeal during his campaign.

Even the most vocal plaintiffs against Prop 187 said they were afraid that if it went to the U.S. Supreme Court it would be held to be constitutional, reversing Plyler v. Doe.

http://www.ccir.net/REFERENCE/187-History.html

A great big FU to the voters.

[thundley4]

http://www.ccir.net/REFERENCE/187-History.html

A great big FU to the voters.

That makes me curious about the Arizona law. It is almost identical to the Cali law, and the Arizona law has a good chance of making it to the USSC. If the AZ law is upheld, would that allow the ruling on the CA law to be vacated?

[Alpha Mare]

The ACLU claims that " It also makes clear that the state cannot regulate immigration, a job clearly assigned by the US constitution and federal law to the national government. "  (http://www.aclu-sc.org/releases/view/100278)
The ACLU claims a lot of things.  I'll see if I can find the actual mediation record.