Tuesday, April 27, 2010


It probably won't surprise you that a Utah Republican is sponsoring a version of the Arizona immigration law in his own state:

As protests in Arizona over an anti-immigration law heat up, one conservative Utah lawmaker wants to bring the law to this state....

Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, is drafting a bill that would require immigrants to carry proof of status and require law enforcement officers to question anyone they believe is in the country without documentation....

But please note that the same guy sponsored legislation in Utah defying the national Real ID Act:

The Utah House voted Thursday for the state to opt out of the national REAL ID Act in yet another move to oppose what many legislators consider an overbearing federal government.

"It's time we say, 'Federal government, stay away from this, let us handle it ourselves,'" said Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, the bill's sponsor....

More from a 2009 news story, when the bill defying the Real ID Act was still under consideration:

The mandate of the U.S. Congress, crafted by the Department of Homeland Security, calls for states to come into an initial level of compliance, including specialized photography to aid facial recognition software and the establishment of an accessible database, by 2010, with further requisites to follow.

Under provisions of HB64, sponsored by Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, the Utah Driver's License Division would be prohibited from implementing the requirements of REAL ID....

Sandstrom's Real ID nullification bill was signed into law last month.

So let's review:

Mandatory ID papers for brown people? Vital to the security of the state!

Somewhat more secure ID cards for everyone? Jackbooted fascism!


And because irony apparently can't die too often, I see that Rick Santorum says Democrats's decision to bring up immigration in D.C. is a "cynical attempt to try to further turn Hispanics away from Republicans." And the effort to turn white people in Arizona (and elsewhere) toward Republicans by means of an immigrant-bashing law ... that wouldn't be cynical at all, would it, Rick?

No comments: