Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Government Privacy United States Your Rights Online

Arizona H-1B Workers Advised to Carry Papers At All Times 884

dcblogs writes "In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Monday on Arizona's immigration enforcement law, H-1B workers are being advised to keep their papers on them. About half of all H-1B visa holders are employed in tech occupations. The court struck down several parts of Arizona's law but nonetheless left in place a core provision allowing police officers to check the immigration status of people in the state at specific times. How complicated this gets may depend on the training of the police officer, his or her knowledge of work visas, and whether an H-1B worker in the state has an Arizona's driver's license. An Arizona state driver's license provides the presumption of legal residency. Nonetheless, H-1B workers could become entangled in this law and suffer delays and even detention while local police, especially those officers and departments unfamiliar with immigration documentation."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Arizona H-1B Workers Advised to Carry Papers At All Times

Comments Filter:
  • by SoundGuyNoise ( 864550 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:23PM (#40445373) Homepage
    Your other license and registration please.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:25PM (#40445397)

    You know, they could be Russian mafia or that guy from Wikileaks.

    Somehow, I doubt it.

    • by bigjarom ( 950328 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:31PM (#40445471) Journal
      I'm a caucasian Canadian citizen living in Arizona on TN-status as a Management Consultant, and I have a valid Arizona driver's license. I doubt that I will be randomly asked for my immigration papers. I somehow don't think that I'm the reason Jan Brewer, Joe Arpaio and company came up with this law.
      • , and I have a valid Arizona driver's license. I doubt that I will be randomly asked for my immigration papers..


        An Arizona state driver's license provides the presumption of legal residency

        So yeah, if you have an AZ driver license, I doubt they'll ask you "papers please"

      • by Ryanrule ( 1657199 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:38PM (#40446505)

        management consultant. Well, I would arrest you for that.

      • You're here legally?

        Then no, you aren't the reason Jan Brewer and company came up with this law.

    • by CannonballHead ( 842625 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:14PM (#40446145)
      While I don't like the law or the checking... this type of argument is not a good way to argue about it. Why should they routinely and often check whites? Arizona is on the border of Mexico. If you have some stats about how many illegally residing Caucasians are in Arizona vs. illegally residing Mexicans that show there's a surprisingly large portion, those would be welcome. Otherwise, I will continue to assume that most of those illegally residing in Arizona, are, in fact, Mexican, due to proximity to Mexico.

      On the other hand, if this were Washington, I would assume most of them are from B.C., so I would be interested in B.C.'s demographics.

      That said, the real issue, to me, is not racial profiling per se; the real issue is that I don't think it's fair that you always have to carry ID or go to jail... i.e., be guilty until proven innocent. Subpoena for proof of citizenship when having actually been involved in something else illegal? Fine. But just being routinely stopped for something that you may not have even done and having to prove your citizenship on the spot?

      (for example: if you're speeding, get pulled over, don't have a license... I see no reason why it's unfair to be penalized in whatever way the law states for driving without a license plus having to prove that you're a citizen in the first place; however, if you are pulled over for speeding and DO have your license, then it's not fair to have to prove citizenship... after-all, you have a license, which is all I [a citizen] carry, so if there's a problem with licenses, then the DMV should be looked at.)

  • this is new how? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jaymz666 ( 34050 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:26PM (#40445411)

    You mean like the work authorization card that you are supposed to carry ANYWAY?

    • by Stirling Newberry ( 848268 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:30PM (#40445455) Homepage Journal
      Your papers please. Don't tell me you don't have them. What, am I supposed to believe you are a citizen? You need to come with me.
  • Okay, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:27PM (#40445417) Journal

    ...not to be too facetious here, but how often does someone from India or Russia sneak in over the Arizona/Mexico border?

    Seriously - this state law was built to stem the tide of one particular group of people. Forget your position on it and all, but consider that Montana certainly has no such laws, even though it borders a different nation as well.

    • Re:Okay, but... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Stirling Newberry ( 848268 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:30PM (#40445459) Homepage Journal
      In Alabama a German executive was detailed. Your papers please.
    • In Montana's case, maybe the Canadians should build a fence?

      Or no, that's right -- Canada doesn't want to make it a pain the ass to visit their country, unlike the US.

    • by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:53PM (#40445785)
      I'm from Russia, and I was stopped at Arizona when I was there to see the Grand Canyon, I was originally on a business trip to California but had several free days. I'd been asked for papers when I was stopped by a police officer for riding a bicycle on sidewalk.

      I didn't have my passport with me so a police officer offered to drive me to my hotel to fetch it or to drive me to the police station to check my identity there. I'd chosen to be driven to my hotel, I have a valid B1/B2 visa so it was not a problem for me.
    • Re:Okay, but... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by darkmeridian ( 119044 ) <william@chuang.gmail@com> on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:12PM (#40446109) Homepage

      That's kind of the problem here. It is a law meant to target Mexicans. The problem is that there are also legal Mexican-Americans who will get ensnared in the law as well. Believe it or not, there are brown folk in Arizona who are in the country legally. After all, we took Texas from the Mexicans. The law, as originally designed, allowed the state government to snatch people off the street if they thought they were illegal immigrants. Query: everyone admits that we're targeting Mexicans with this law, so how do you protect the rights of Mexican-Americans while still targeting illegal immigrants? Answer: you can't.

      The better approach is from the demand side and go after employers of illegal immigrants. But good luck getting Arizona to target big business. Or you can check someone's immigration status after you've arrested them for another crime, which seems to be where we're headed now because it has the ancillary benefit of deporting illegal immigrants who commit crimes, but it will also force illegal immigrants to walk on eggshells.

  • by Darkness404 ( 1287218 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:27PM (#40445419)
    When will we realize that immigrants, "legal" and otherwise do not cause problems but rather raise the standard of living for -everyone-?
    • by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:41PM (#40445603)
      As a Native American, I disagree.
    • by trout007 ( 975317 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:43PM (#40445633)

      The only problems with immigrants are due to our own stupid laws that attract the wrong kind of immigrants and the problems they bring. The war on drugs brings the drug gangs, the war on poverty brings the destitute that aren't here to work but be a parasite, and the war on terror brings the ever elusive mid-eastern terrorist posing as a mexican.

    • We're talking about H-1Bs, not immigrants. Yes, it is a fact that a H-1B visa is *NOT* an immigration visa, it is a temporary employment in the USA which allows that person to relocate here for the duration of employment.

      But I'll bite. Here's why people are upset about it: To get H-1Bs, companies must jump through hoops, and those hoops damage our job market and the value of our jobs. Also, H-1Bs are willing to accept a lower salary because they get to live in the USA without immigrating. This is wh
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ClioCJS ( 264898 )
      You classify legal and illegal immigrants together, but they are not. Don't insult my grandparents. When Prince William County, VA, enacted a similar law, it cut down on a lot of trouble. Murders halved from 9/yr annually to 4/yr annually, because 50% of the murders were by illegal immigrants. Over $100M in english-as-a-second-language class tax money was saved. If you want to come to our country legally, learn english to pass the entrance exam first, on your own time, not on my dime. I wouldn't expect I c
  • by rueger ( 210566 ) * on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:33PM (#40445499) Homepage
    I've always wondered what would happen if you just appeared with no papers of any sort - no fingerprints on file, no proof of citizenship or residency, no SS number, no passport.

    Suppose you appeared in the middle of Arizona and stated that you are a natural born American citizen, and that you were born at home so there are no records?

    What would happen if no-one carried any identification?
  • by kurt555gs ( 309278 ) <kurt555gs AT ovi DOT com> on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:36PM (#40445539) Homepage

    I'm a mid 50's white guy. I always keep my passport with me when I travel through Arizona. One never knows. From a distance, at night, I may be suspected of being a Canadian.

  • by nickovs ( 115935 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:38PM (#40445563)

    As someone who doesn't have US citizenship but who lives and works in the US, creating businesses that have hired hundreds of people (including plenty of H1-B holders) I have an alternate approach; I shall simply be avoiding Arizona as much as possible. I shall not be holding any group meetings there, I'll see what I can do to avoid conventions there or transfers through PHX and they can kiss goodbye to any prospect of my opening offices there. I'm probably too white to actually be harassed under this law but that doesn't make it any less disgusting to me.

  • by saikou ( 211301 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:44PM (#40445641) Homepage

    I'm pretty sure that non-citizens were required to carry "registration" papers with them before. But hey, not everything gets enforced...


    (e) Personal possession of registration or receipt card; penalties
    Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d) of this section. Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.

    • by Glendale2x ( 210533 ) <{su.yeknomajnin} {ta} {todhsals}> on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:54PM (#40445819) Homepage

      I don't really see what all this whining is about. My dad did not become a US citizen until after I graduated from high school and he had a resident alien card in his wallet next to his driver's license. His citizenship was delayed for a long time due to processing backlog. In that interim period though it didn't seem to be a big deal. Why is this hard?

      • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:16PM (#40446177) Homepage Journal

        I don't really see what all this whining is about. My dad did not become a US citizen until after I graduated from high school and he had a resident alien card in his wallet next to his driver's license. His citizenship was delayed for a long time due to processing backlog. In that interim period though it didn't seem to be a big deal. Why is this hard?

        Oh, well then. Let me explain it to you.

        You see, there's this famous expression "throwing out the baby with the bathwater" which means, essentially, sometimes actions which are well intentioned have negative consequences.

        If you look narrowly at, well, just about anything you can spin it as a good thing. It's sometimes difficult to see the effects that something has on the global population, or society at large.

        You see, even though the law is aimed at illegal immigrants, and only applies to illegal immigrants, it's pretty certain that a lot of legal citizens will have their rights violated because of this law.

        Rights which we have enjoyed and held dear for many years.

        If you take the trouble to see what effect this law will have on everyone, you realize (as does every other "whiner" on this thread), that the supreme court has just thrown out one of our most cherished rights, and hastened this country into the decay of fascism.

        I assure you, this is something worth whining about.

    • So, what happens when I get pulled over, and the police officer asks for proof that I am here legally, and I inform him that I am a naturalized US citizen (which I am), and thus am not required to carry any such paperwork? What if I was Illegal and said the same thing?

      If the police can not question that lie, then the law is a farce anyway. If they can, then a whole lot of citizens are going to have their rights violated.

  • by nimbius ( 983462 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:46PM (#40445681) Homepage
    why states enact these laws other than pandering to their geriatric neoconservative constituents and ginning up a scapegoat for high unemployment rates.
  • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @06:50PM (#40445755) Homepage Journal

    Many states have implemented "must identify [wikipedia.org]" laws, which state that you must identity yourself (correctly) to a policeman when asked. Depending on the state, you're also required to correctly answer other questions, such as "what you are doing there, where did you come from, where you are going".

    These laws were brought to the attention of the supreme court, which stated flatly that these laws were constitutional so long as no proof of identity was required. Short of an arrest, police cannot demand proof of ID just for being in an area. (I don't believe that proof of license to drive a car on the highway has been addressed directly.)

    With this new ruling, states can pass laws that allow police to detain anyone who cannot prove their identity, on the theory that they *might* be illegal immigrants.

    The "must identify" laws effectively did away with anonymous meetings and anonymous protest. The police can simply wait outside any meeting and ask the participants their names as they leave.

    Now they can demand proof of ID as well.

    The right to peaceably assemble anonymously, the right to be in public anonymously, the right to protest anonymously is gone.

  • Which means.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gman003 ( 1693318 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:01PM (#40445929)

    Okay, so the immigrant workers are going to carry their papers. And many of the illegal ones, or at least the smart ones, will carry forged papers - at least ones good enough to pass cursory inspection.

    But what about the native-born citizens? Not everyone has a driver's license (or an Arizona license - would my Virginia driver's license count as "proof of citizenship"?), and I highly doubt citizens will be carrying around their birth certificates or anything - after all, they're not immigrants, why should they be concerned about an immigration law.

    This is basically carte blanche for the police to harass anyone, and non-immigrants are going to be surprisingly affected.

    In any case, I'm now mentally filing "Arizona" next to "East Germany", because both require me to have my papers in ordnung (and because both are effectively in the past - E.G. literally, Arizona figuratively).

    • The law says that people that are arrested can/may/should (I don't recall the exact words) have their immigration status checked. The important part is that the person must be arrested for some other crime FIRST before their "papers" are requested.

      The law also specifically states that an officer cannot use this law as a primary offense for the arrest and cannot use race as the basis for checking immigration status. I realize that this does not really prevent officers from abusing the law but around here w

  • by russotto ( 537200 ) on Monday June 25, 2012 @07:08PM (#40446043) Journal

    If an H-1B worker carries a California drivers license and is pulled over on a traffic stop in Arizona, the presumption of legal status with an Arizona driver's license goes away, said Jorge Lopez, co-chair of the Immigration & Global Migration Practice at Littler Mendelson.

    "Papers? What the fuck, man, I was born in East LA!"

All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.