Browse By

Nearly 100 Cities: May 1 Protest Against Immigration Police State Spreads in a Wildfire of Outrage

Last week, in case you hadn’t heard, Arizona passed a law subjecting law-abiding U.S. citizens and residents to warrantless search and detention without probable cause.

You read that right. Don’t let someone limit discussion of this new law, SB 1070, to illegal immigration and their illegal illegality, because the truth is that the law does not only apply to people who break the law. Indeed, the central problem is that this Arizona law violates the greater constitutional law in order to accost people, search them and detain them without probable cause to believe they have done a single thing wrong. Under the United States Constitution, the supreme law of the land, a person cannot be searched and have their papers and effects seized except on the basis of “probable cause,” actual evidence indicating that this person has broken the law. It’s spelled out in the 4th Amendment.

Instead of following the requirements of the constitution and demanding probable cause before action, Arizona law SB 1070 allows — no, requires — a police officer to demand that any old person walking down the street produce documentation to prove they aren’t an illegal immigrant, if the police officer so much as suspects the person might be an illegal immigrant. Then, if that person doesn’t have proof of their citizenship or legal immigration status on them, the police officer is to send the person off to detention until they can prove their legal status. SB 1070 actually allows anyone in Arizona (think Minutemen) to bring a lawsuit and inflict significant financial penalties on any city or town in Arizona for not pursuing such action to the fullest extent possible.

Your papers, please! Papiere, bitte! Search and detention on mere suspicion, not on the basis of probable cause. A free state turned into a police state. Is this the America you believe in?

Millions of Americans are voicing their firm “NO!” Yesterday, I noted that more than 70 cities across the nation had organized protests for this Saturday, May 1 in favor of saner, more humane, more constitutional immigration, search and detention policy. Well, in just 24 hours that number has grown even larger. As of this hour, the American cities and towns hosting protest marches number nearly 100. In addition to the cities I listed yesterday, these communities have added their own protests over the last day:

Flagstaff, AZ
Fresno, CA
Stockton, CA
Watsonville, CA
Bloomington, IL
Denison, IA
Wichita, KS
New Orleans, LA
Lincoln, NE
Las Vegas, NV
Southampton, NY
Asheville, NC
Greensboro, NC
Kernersville, NC
Alexandria, VA

Click here for the full list.

You don’t have to be or even know an illegal immigrant to have this issue affect you. All you need to do is look at yourself in the mirror before you step out on the street and ask yourself, “Do I look like an illegal immigrant today?”

17 thoughts on “Nearly 100 Cities: May 1 Protest Against Immigration Police State Spreads in a Wildfire of Outrage”

  1. ramone says:

    i’m writing my congresswoman, michele, in the hopes she will join in and stand up for the fourth amendment. the tea partiers should all come out and support the constitution on may 1st.
    seriously, i hope this protest against SB1070 is large and protracted and is seen as a direct response to the tea party movement. no amount of backpedaling can make this law look responsible. anyone defending SB1070 should find their political future in jeopardy.

  2. Tomas says:

    …they are here illegally, whatever it takes to remove them…they broke the law, the Feds will not enforce it, then good for Arizona for taking it upon themselves. The state of Arizona has the courage that our spinless President doesn’t.

    1. Jim says:

      Atomic bombs to Bisbee, then! Whatever it takes, right?

      1. Tomas says:


      2. Tomas says:

        …I already answered you’re poor attempt at humor….

    2. Peregrin Wood says:

      The end justifies the means? No, that’s not how the law works. We don’t do guilty until proven innocent in the United States, Tomas.

      1. Tomas says:

        …but they are guilty, of illegal border crossing….

        1. Jim says:

          “they” being the people who the police detain because they suspect them, without probable cause, of possibly being illegal immigrants?

          So everybody the police suspects of being an illegal immigrant is actually an illegal immigrant, even when there’s no probable cause based on evidence? Wow, I had no idea the police were so accurate. Isn’t it great to have a government that we can trust is always right, Tomas?

  3. Tom says:

    “Do you haff your papers?”
    “Vir haben ein special train to take you someplatz in zat case.”

    All aboard!

  4. mirna says:

    As an american citizen, i feel the need to tell you people that illegal immigrants have the right to be here.. we conquered them, we took there land the least we can do is respect them in all means. what seperates us from them is the skin color.. we are no different. I truly hope that california is not the only state that is trying to legalize them. We should stop the hate between eachother. The change starts with my children, husband and loved ones. We do not support SB1070

  5. Samantha says:

    Hello, everybody what i’m trying to figure out is what is wrong with immigration.! There just as equal as any U.S. Citizen. Just because there were born in a different country dosent make them any different from any one else! Most immigrants come to the United States to live a better life or to be with their famliy or etc. Now if you lived in Mexcio or Canda or where ever you would like to see your family you probably come over the boader to see your loved ones or live a better life. Were ALL EQUAL it dosent matter of are skin color or our backgrounds. I’m just a 14 yr old girl speakin the TRUTH!! plz reply :]] thnxz i would like you opinion.

  6. Millie says:

    The real truth about immigration is hard to find but I have done some checking and this is what I found. (Please google these yourself so you can say it isn’t true) Immigrants ravage U.S. Infrastructure – $1.6 trillion required to repair devastation according to Edwin S. Rubenstein a financial analyst and former contributing editor of Forbes and economics editor of National Review. Immigrants make up 21% of the school age population in the U.S. In CA 47% of the school age population consists of immigrants or the children of immigrants. Hospitals that serve primarily uninsured immigrants cannot afford their facilities. The uncompensated costs are killing them. In CA 60 Emergency departments have closed to avoid the uncompensated cost of their largely illegal alien caseloads. In 2006 alone it underpaid hospitals by $11.3 billion. Most aliens live near the border and their sheer numbers have strained water supplies and some cities could run out of water in 10 years. CA electric utility will require $142 billion to keep generator capacity at recommended levels due to increasing population. America’s national parks are bearing the brunt of immigration because roads and paths are made in the parks and they leave everything from beer cans etc. to human waste. They spray paint trees and rocks and the campfires start wildfires. Cost for securing the boarders are expected to increase. They have underground tunnels that amount to superhighways in to the U.S. The average immigrant household generates a fiscal debt of $3,480 after federal benefits are considered. At the state and local level, the fiscal debt amounts to $4,398 per immigrant household. There are about 36 million immigrants living in about 9 million households so the deficit attributable to immigrants come to about $70.3 billion Rubenstein states. Immigrants could deplete the amount of funds available for infrastructure by as much as $70 billion per year. The U.S. Census Bureau, projecting that the U.S. population will reach 433 million by 2050 increasing 44 percent or 135 million from today’s numbers. 82 percent of the increase will be due to new immigrants and their U.S. born children.
    Other articles to check out yourself are: Study proves illegals likely to commit crimes, Illegal baby boom hits Big Easy, Satellites will help Mexicans sneak in, Illegal-alien advocates play down Mexican flag, Marchers say gringos, not illegals, have o go, Illegals estimated to number 18-20 million, 3 million illegals to U.S. this year., Study: Illegals cost U.S. $10 billion a yr.
    I also suggest you google May Day riots in San Francisco, Ashville, Santa Cruz and find out what really happened at these gatherings. It was far from peaceful.
    I also would like to add that everyday in AZ. 3 border patrol agents are injured by border crossers and every 35 min. someone is kidnapped and 80% of the illegals have criminal records.
    Mexico admitted that 10’s of thousands of illegals from other countries cross through there county every year but they failed to mention that 4 out of 6 women are raped by government officials and Mexican gangs.
    these people from other countries do you thing some of them just might be people who want to harm us? We need to close the border and stop the flow of money to people who don’t go thru the process of trying to become legal.

    1. Jim says:

      When you said “google these yourself so you can say it isn’t true,” you weren’t kidding.

      Picking just one claim, that “The average immigrant household generates a fiscal debt of $3,480 after federal benefits are considered. At the state and local level, the fiscal debt amounts to $4,398 per immigrant household,” I can find NO google result containing these figures, Millie. Can you cite the particular primary source document for this claim?

    2. Jim says:

      Another example of your inaccuracy: the “May Day riot” in Santa Cruz was not at an immigration rally. It was at a labor rally, and it was crashed by anarchists.

      So pardon me if I don’t believe your assertions. If you want me to take them seriously, attach links to primary sources.

  7. Millie says:

    I don’t know how to attach links otherwise I would have. I will tell you which articles to google. The articles are : Immigrants ravage U.S. infrastructure, – Look how much money illegals milking you for, – mayday, mayday, this is the USA, – Immigrants Riot in Santa Cruz, – The may day angry mob you won’t see

    All you have to do is google them, I did and I was able to find each article without a problem.

    1. Jim says:

      To link, simply use html tags.

      The source documents behind your “riot” links describe anarchists, not immigrants, as the source of the problem in Santa Cruz. You will get no argument from me about anarchists.

      I couldn’t find the original article you refer to — which is not a reliable primary source document but rather a secondary report at the unreliable WorldNetDaily, because you’d transposed two of the numbers in your “$3,480” claim — in what WorldNetDaily purports to be the primary source document author Edwin Rubenstein claims it’s $3,408.

      I say “purports” because the WorldNetDaily article to which you refer claims Edwin Rubenstein is the source of this information through his own research:

      In his research, Rubenstein finds that the average immigrant household generates a fiscal debt of $3,408 after federal benefits and taxes are considered. At the state and local level, the fiscal debt amounts to $4.398 per immigrant household.

      But this is not true. Rubenstein’s report is itself a secondary source: he engages in no primary research to verify these figures. (This makes the WorldNetDaily article a third-hand account.) Rather, he only writes about a 13-year-old National Research Council study (page 15):

      There is surprisingly little objective research on the fiscal burden imposed by immigrants. The best study is still The New Americans, the National Research Council’s (NRC) 1997 study of immigration’s economic and demographic impact. The NRC staff analyzed federal, state, and local government expenditures on programs such as Medicaid, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (now TANF, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families), and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), as well as the cost of educating immigrants’
      foreign- and native-born children. The NRC also estimated the average immigrant household’s share of police and fire protection,
      public works, recreation, higher education, and municipal assistance.

      NRC found that immigrant households receive an average $13,326 in federal benefits while paying $10,664 in federal taxes, that is, they generate a fiscal deficit of $2,682 (1996 dollars) per household. In 2007 dollars, this deficit is $3,408 per household.

      The fiscal damage is even more acute at the state and local level. Public education, at a cost of $7,737 per immigrant household, accounts for nearly half of what immigrants currently receive from state and local governments.

      Means-tested welfare programs rank second, accounting for about one-fifth of all immigrant-related spending by state and local governments. States are required to contribute to as many as 60 different federal means-tested programs, including Medicaid and TANF.

      The NRC study found that state and local benefits received by the average immigrant household exceed the amount of state and local taxes paid by such households by $4,398 (2007 dollars).

      What Rubenstein SAYS the report finds is not what the report ACTUALLY finds. Read the original report here (see Chapter 6), which provide state-level findings only for immigrants to two states: New Jersey and California, and The New Americans notes (again see Chapter 6) that these are unrepresentative states in which the cost of immigration is likely to be especially high. Neither you nor Rubenstein mention this fact. The focus of Rubenstein’s article and the original National Academy of Sciences study is immigration overall, not illegal immigration, so the numbers, even if true don’t apply to illegal immigrants, which is the subject matter here.

      Getting to the meat of the matter, I quote from Chapter 6:

      The state and local net annual fiscal impact of current immigrant-headed households on native residents measured as the difference between the costs of state and local services received and state and local taxes paid for New Jersey residents (for fiscal year 1989-90 adjusted to 1996 dollars) is estimated at $232 per native household. Similarly constructed estimates for the net annual fiscal impact of current immigrant-headed households on native residents for California residents (for fiscal year 1994-95 adjusted to 1996 dollars) is estimated at $1,178 per native household.

      On average, immigrant-headed households in California made a net fiscal contribution to the federal budget in fiscal year 1994-95, receiving less in services and transfers than they paid in taxes….

      Estimates of the net fiscal burden imposed on all 89,019,000 U.S. native households by all 9,156,000 U.S. immigrant-headed households through all levels of government range from $166 per native household to $226 per native household.

      These figures do not match Rubenstein’s, do they?

      I wouldn’t be surprised if it turned out in a more recent study that immigrants actually did consume more in dollars in services than they provided in dollars in taxes. That might be true. But after reading your report of WorldNetDaily, WorldNetDaily’s report of Rubenstein, and Rubenstein’s report of The New Americans, and after reading the actual report The New Americans, I can see that somebody’s been practicing inflation. Don’t trust WorldNetDaily and Rubenstein. Both have an axe to grind. Go find and read the original source documents.

  8. Millie says:

    I don’t know what html tags are either.

    You can go to the website: Edwin S. Rubenstein released his report on Jan. 13, 2009 to the National Press in Washington, D.C. You can read more about the report and also hear a video that is on that site.

    You mentioned he had an ax to grind and I am not sure what you meant by that. I found that article and printed it and then somehow I got to this page and found it interesting and decided to leave a comment.

    The mayday website belongs to: Michele Malkin – The Mayday angry mob you won’t see – She has pictures and comments. I found it very interesting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!