"Stopping Arizona's Anti-Immigration Law." Editorial. The New York Times (April 30, 2010) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/30/opinion/30fri1.html This New York Times article outlines the author's perspective on Arizona's new immigration law. The author questions the beliefs in which this country was founded upon saying, “Is our core belief still the welcome and assimilation of newcomers?” This article is suggesting that it is time for the federal government step in and put an end to “poison” of a law instead of “mildly criticize” it. The author of this article outlines a three step plan that he or she think the President should enforce against the new immigration law. He/she starts out by saying the government needs to defend civil rights, stop Arizona cold and take back immigration policy. The article elaborates on these steps. The author admits that “these steps are no substitutes for immigration reform” and knows that this list is not a quick solution but it could work. Says the “federal government must react forcefully to the Arizona statute” and is most definitely arguing in favor of immigrants.
"Editorial: Arizona immigration bill misguided and dangerous" The Stanford Daily 4/29/2010 http://www.stanforddaily.com/2010/04/29/editorial-arizona-immigration-bill-misguided-and-dangerous/ This editorial says that America is in agreement about the fact that we need some new immigration policies, but goes on to say that S.B. 1070 goes too far. The Author believes that the bill gives too much power to local law officials and that it "contains no clear guidelines for identifying those without proper documentation." This article points out that this bill not only effects illegal immigrants, but also American citizens, since local law officials do not know if they are questioning citizens or illegal immigrants. This, the article sees, is a violation of our rights. The bill, they claim, is vague and unclear as to what will be counted as "reasonable suspicion" because it is against the law to make that decision based on ethnicity alone. Ethnicity, the article states, is obviously the number one criteria for "reasonable suspicion", though this is unconstitutional, and ignoring this fact is dangerous. Also, state police are not granted permission to enforce immigration policy, though this is what the bill states and what the local police are asked to do. (Michael Buckley) Stevenson, M. (11 November 2010). Study: 100,000 Hispanics leave Arizona after immigration law debated. MSNBC. Retrieved From: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40141843/ns/us_news-immigration_a_nation_divided/#.T4LuT5iXDap This was an article reported from the Associated Press in November 2010, months after the bill was introduced which created much controversy in the public spotlight. This says a study shows that 100,000 or more immigrants have fled Arizona in response to this law to go to states with much more conservative or immigrant friendly states, such as New Mexico or