People may also look for certain services, like medical treatment or life-saving surgery, which may be unavailable in their native country.
At first sight, both regions seem to experience similar immigration pressures: each area has accepted the recent working immigrants’ waves from poor regions and has already huge groups of skilled aliens as well as asylees.
Various civil rights groups and organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), contested the law, arguing that it is a form of racial bias against immigrants.
The federal government challenged the law on the theory that Arizona, through enactment of the law, was infringing upon the government’s superior power to enforce federal immigration law.where the Court nullified three of the law’s four provisions, either because they operated in areas controlled by federal policy or because they interfered with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
However, the Court left one contested provision intact—section 2(B), referred to as the “show your papers” provision, requires police to arrest anyone they believe has committed a crime and whom they think is in the country illegally, and hold the individual until their immigration status can be checked with federal officials.
Section 2(B) arguably lends itself to rampant racial profiling against Latinos, Asian-Americans, and others presumed to be illegal immigrants solely based on their appearances, by requiring police officers to demand the papers of the people they had “reasonable suspicion” to believe were in the country illegally.
In September 2016, through a settlement with the National Immigration Law Center and other immigrants’ rights groups that sued six years ago after the enactment of S. 1070, Arizona announced an end to its practice of enforcing section 2(B). 1070, including its legislative history, the challenges to the law offered in and the settlement over section 2(B).
This paper argues that despite the decision to stop enforcing the “show your papers” provision of S. 1070, rampant racial profiling will likely still take place in Arizona and other border states. Section III will consider the history of stop-and-frisk laws in New York City and how the various changes to the stop-and-frisk programs set forth to combat the problem of racial profiling in the city have not been as successful as intended.
In addition to the pain of parting with the immediate family, the aliens face such problems as unemployment, abuse, lack of governmental support and non-acceptance by the society, being viewed as part of a minority group.
The push or driving factors are the reasons why people wish to leave their native land, while the pull factors stand for the reasons why the individuals want to settle in a new area.