Arizona Racial Profiling Law Threatens Civil Liberties

JUNE 30, 2010 – In response to civil liberties threats caused by the recent passage of Arizona’s racial profiling law, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico (ACLU-NM) issued a travel alert today informing New Mexico residents of their rights when stopped by law enforcement when traveling in Arizona. The unconstitutional law, known as SB 1070, requires law enforcement agents to demand "papers" from people they stop who they suspect are not authorized to be in the U.S. If individuals are unable to prove to officers that they are permitted to be in the U.S., they may be subject to warrantless arrest without any probable cause that they have committed a crime.
Although the law is not scheduled to go into effect until July 29, ACLU-NM is concerned that some police officers and sheriff's deputies are already beginning to act on provisions of the law. Arizona law enforcement has a well-documented history of racial profiling, especially in Maricopa County.  Arizona lawmakers have espoused a policy of “attrition through enforcement” that is meant to create such a hostile environment for people perceived to be immigrants that they flee the state. “We want to ensure that New Mexicans understand the increased risk for illegal harassment and unlawful detentions when traveling in Arizona,” said Peter Simonson, Executive Director of the ACLU-NM. “Our proud tradition of diversity and multi-culturalism means that one in two New Mexicans would fit the racial profile that police will inevitably use to enforce the law. New Mexico residents should also be aware that, because our driver’s licenses do not require proof of legal residence to obtain, they may not satisfy Arizona’s criteria for identification under the new Arizona racial profiling law.”
In addition to the travel alert, the ACLU has made available in English and Spanish materials on individuals’ rights if stopped by law enforcement in Arizona or other states as a result of SB 1070 or for any other reason. The materials include a downloadable card with instructions – applicable in any state – on coping with vehicle stops and questioning by police, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents or the FBI, as well as a Frequently Asked Questions document about SB 1070.
“If I could only give one piece of advice to New Mexicans planning to travel in Arizona, it would be ‘Know your Rights’,” said Vicki Gaubeca, Director of the ACLU-NM Regional Center for Border Rights. “If you look or sound ‘foreign,’ you are more likely to be subjected to pretextual stops for minor infractions such as a cracked windshield or jaywalking. Law enforcement officers may believe that you are in the country unlawfully just because of the way you look, and your best protection against harassment is a thorough understanding of your rights.”
The ACLU and other leading civil rights organizations filed a lawsuit challenging the Arizona law in May, but until the law is struck down, the ACLU warns that individuals traveling in Arizona must be aware of their rights if stopped there. If you are stopped by law enforcement in Arizona and you believe that racial profiling was a factor, you can submit a written complaint online at the ACLU-NM website at: https://aclu-nm.org/contact-us/before-submitting-your-complaint/
Materials informing individuals of their rights when stopped by law enforcement can be found at: https://www.aclu-nm.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/ACLU-bust-card-2010_final.pdf and in Spanish at https://www.aclu-nm.org/es/centro-regional-para-derechos-fronterizos/conoce-tus-derechos/
More information about the Arizona law, including an ACLU video and slide show, can be found at: www.aclu.org/what-happens-arizona-stops-arizona
More information about the lawsuit, including information on co-counsel and plaintiffs—including ACLU-NM’s own Vicki Gaubeca—can be found at: www.aclu.org/immigrants-rights-racial-justice/aclu-and-civil-rights-groups-file-legal-challenge-arizona-racial-pr
More information about the ACLU of New Mexico’s work on racial profiling can be found at: www.aclu-nm.org.
CONTACT: Micah McCoy, (505) 266-5915 Ext. 1003 or [email protected]

By Peter Simonson, ACLU-NM Executive Director

The GOP’s efforts to convince voters that the election system is wracked by fraud took another hit last week when the NM Court of Appeals rejected the Party’s effort to get a hold of the names and addresses of undocumented immigrants who have received state driver's licenses.  The GOP had hoped to use the information to check whether non-citizen immigrants were registered to vote in New Mexico.
Talk about a wild goose chase.  What immigrant is going to risk felony charges, permanent deportation, and the total upheaval of his or her family just to cast a ballot in a US election?  Barely fifty percent of American citizens exercise that right even in the best of years!
What’s really concerning is how readily local GOP leaders will sacrifice individuals’ right to privacy in the zeal to find evidence of voter fraud.  Two years ago the ACLU sued members of the Republican Party for violating state privacy laws after the Party obtained copies of individual voter registration forms and released the information to the press.  GOP members also used the information to track down lawful voters and challenge their right to vote in their homes.
Americans don’t need another disincentive to vote, like the belief that fraud so compromises the election system that voting is fruitless.  If the GOP truly has the best interests of our electoral democracy in mind, it should devote its effort to encouraging New Mexicans to take part in elections.  It could start by promoting mobile vote registration campaigns and removing ID requirements for voting in Albuquerque elections.

Like a bad penny, the death penalty is back in the news again due to the conviction of Michael Astorga for the murder of sheriff’s Deputy James McGrane, Jr.  Although the state legislature voted to repeal the death penalty and replace it with life without parole and Governor Richardson signed the bill into law over a year ago, Astorga committed his crime before the death penalty repeal went into effect on July 1, 2009 so he is still eligible for the ultimate punishment. Fortunately, this is probably the last time taxpayers will need to fund a death penalty murder prosecution. No other murders that occurred before the law changed involve the death penalty, with one exception—if someone is arrested and convicted for the multiple murders of the women found out on the West Mesa, it would also likely be a death penalty case.
The thing that has annoyed me the most about seeing Astorga’s conviction splashed across the news, is the reaction of the politicians. Not only is the “tough on crime” posturing back, it has a twist—now the question is which woman governor wannabe is the toughest on crime. Who’s willing to pull the switch, or plunge the needle? Heaven forbid we elect a squeamish governor who doesn’t have the stomach to “follow the law of the land.”  As a feminist since birth, I’d always hoped that the advent of women in politics would project some rationality into the debate on the critical issues of the day. But American voters don’t seem to respond to rationality—and there is no issue more emotional than murder and the death penalty.
Also making news recently, was the Utah execution by firing squad of Ronnie Lee Gardner last Friday. Utah resumed use of the death penalty in 1977 when Gary Mark Gilmore was the first man to face the firing squad after the U.S. Supreme Court had first declared the death penalty cruel and unusual punishment and then changed course and allowed states to punish by death with restrictions. The difference this time was that the Utah AG Mark Shurtleff tweeted about the event. I think that’s an excellent demonstration of how capital punishment actually trivializes and de-values human life.
We will be hearing more about the death penalty in New Mexico because Michael Astorga gets a second jury trial to determine if he will be sentenced to death. Jury selection is currently scheduled to begin September 1^st. The sentencing trial will last four to six weeks. New Mexico juries do not impose the death penalty very often. I hope they don’t do it in this case either. It would be a violation of the public’s will if Astorga is sentenced to death despite our repeal of the death penalty.
-Kathleen MacRae, Development Director
Learn more about the ACLU's work to abolish the death penalty, the ultimate denial of civil liberties.