Senator Steinberg Writes Back

I received the following email from a colleague, sent to Senator Darrell Steinberg by a constituent, expressing her dismay with his call to boycott Arizona businesses because of the recent legislation attempting to deal with the state’s illegal immigration problem.

What’s even more interesting is that California Penal Code Section 834b states “Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, and attempt to verify the legal residency status of the person arrested.” (full text below)

A friend who is in law enforcement confirmed that this is indeed state law, making California and Arizona’s laws practically identical.

Dear Sen. Steinberg:

Have you read SB 1070?  Federal law dating back to the Roosevelt administration requires all immigrants to carry papers.  States require people driving a car to show a driver’s license.  The law states that police MUST have another police reason for stopping the person other than they look like an immigrant.  So SB 1070 does not create new illegalities, and is not racist or unconstitutional.  To say AZ will use this in a racist fashion is a gross insult to law enforcement.  I noticed that Doris Matsui does not read bills either. What is it with you Democrats?

Sincerely,

XXXX, MD


Senator Darrell Steinberg’s response – notice that he did not use her professional title in his salutation:

Dear Ms. XXXX:

Thank you for your recent communication in support of Arizona’s recently enacted immigration law, SB 1070. This bill aims to identify, prosecute, and deport undocumented immigrants. This bill makes failing to carry immigration papers a crime and gives the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

As you are probably aware, I recently wrote a letter to the Governor requesting that he inventory all contracts between the states of California and Arizona or any Arizona businesses to determine whether or not any of those contracts have escape clauses.  I have also asked that California not enter into any new contracts with Arizona entities as a way to encourage Arizona to repeal SB 1070.  I find the Arizona law as unconscionable as it is unconstitutional.  It is my firm belief that the state of California should not be using taxpayer dollars to support such a policy.

The regulation of immigration is exclusively the province of the federal government, and the Arizona law threatens to undermine basic civil liberties guaranteed to all Americans – regardless of immigration status. As such, it should be challenged and struck down by the courts or repealed.  I believe that all people have the obligation to stand up and speak out when we witness acts of overt discrimination, especially acts by government to sanction discrimination.  This law, by definition, allows law enforcement to stop people because of the color of their skin.  It is against everything this country stands for.

Although I believe that a vast majority of law enforcement officers would not stop people because of their race, some would, and SB 1070 is their license to do so.

Despite our differences on this issue, I trust that we agree on far more issues than we disagree.  I appreciate hearing from my constituents on issues of concern to them.  Please continue to express your views to me so I may best represent you in the state Senate.

If you need my assistance or have concerns about any other matter, please do not hesitate to call my office at (916) 651-1529, or email me at [email protected].

Sincerely,

DARRELL STEINBERG

President pro Tempore

6th Senate District

DS:ep

What struck me was not only the Senator’s apparent ignorance of the actual Arizona and California laws, but his narcissistic and condescending response. Darrell Steinberg is a lawyer, and I am not, nor is the doctor who penned the letter. Is it ignorance, arrogance, or is he in that deeply with the Democrat and public employee union agenda?

PENAL CODE SECTION 833-851.90

834b a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws.

(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following:

(1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of

immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.

(2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminaljustice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or leave the United States.

(3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal status and provide any additional information that may be requested by any other public entity.

(c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city, county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly prohibited.

– Katy Grimes

No comments

Write a comment
  1. Erik Smitt
    Erik Smitt 20 May, 2010, 17:11

    Like the doctor, I doubt I agree with Darrell Steinberg on much. I read the Arizona law when it was signed by the Governor. It is nice to know that we have equivalent law in California. It is unfortunate that we do not follow the rule of law here.

    http://www.eriksmittforcongress.com/news/immigrationlegalandillegal-1

    “Common sense often makes a good law.” Justice William O. Douglas

    Reply this comment
  2. EastBayLarry
    EastBayLarry 20 May, 2010, 18:39

    Sounds like Californias’ law is very similiar to Arizonas’. So where’s the beef?

    Of course, the email sounds like boiler plate that gets selected based upon the general theme being replied to, not a serious response addressing the issues, (which makes it just like every response I have ever gotten from a liberal/democrat).

    Reply this comment
  3. mary gagliardi
    mary gagliardi 24 June, 2010, 18:37

    i SAW YOU ON GRETA – I AM SO EMBARASSED FOR CALIFORNIA
    WE HAVE THE EXACT LAW AS ARIZONA – WE HAVE HIRING LAWS HERE
    IN CALIFORNIA – LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT WE ARE BILLIONS IN THE
    HOLE AND WE ARE WORRED ABOUT ARIZONA ??? LETS CERTAINLY BOYCOT
    THEM = AND WHO WORKS AT THE HOTELS, RESTAURANTS, AND AIRPORTS ???
    ARIZONA BUYS FROM US MANY COMMODITIES – FRUIT , WINE ETC
    WE CAN AFFORD TO LOSE BUSINESS – GREAT THINKING- SOUNDS LIKE OUR
    FARMERS WILL TAKE ANOTHER HIT – PLEASE, PLEASE LETS MIND OUR OWN
    BUSINESS AND TAKE CARE OF OUR BUSINESS
    THANK YOU MVG
    PS I WAS ALSO GLAD TO SEE THAT LA SCHOOLS COULD AFFORD A GROUP OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TAKE A BUS TO ARIZONA TO BOYCOTT ? LA SCHOOL SYSTEM
    MUST BE BOOMING —

    Reply this comment
  4. Leni
    Leni 15 March, 2012, 19:18

    I’m Latino, Democrat, Gay, and I support this Arizona law!The fact is, iagllel aliens have “more” rights than gay people. Illegal aliens can see their opposite sex partners in hospitals, and up until just 2 weeks ago when Obama signed an executive order allowing same-sex couples to see one another in hospitals, same sex couples would have been continually barred from seeing one another. Illegal aliens can marry an American citizen, gay people cannot marry in most states in the US. Illegal aliens can march on Washington and request some type of amnesty from a president who supports selective amnesty, gay people can march on Washington, but Obama doesn’t support same sex marriage.Illegal aliens broke the law entering our country and are using their anchor babies (born here in the US) to anchor onto benefits that taxpayers pay for which include: public housing, free rent, food stamps, Medicaid, unemployment, and Earned Income Tax Credit. Additionally,there’s nothing to stop them from having more kids in order to convince a judge to let them stay in the US. On the other hand, many states don’t allow gay Americans to adopt children.Illegal aliens should all be deported now. We need to end birthright citizenship, and deny iagllels social services. Americans are ultimately left to pick up the bill for the billions in services they receive for free all the while paying nothing into the system and send all their earned money back to Mexico to help our their country, not ours.Citizens paying taxes into the system, regardless of sexual orientation, should come FIRST before iagllel aliens who are leaving struggling Americans footing the bill. Illegal aliens are also blatantly disregarding our citizenship laws and are abusing the public assistance system to their advantage. This needs to stop NOW!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*


Related Articles

Prop. 30 lovers inexplicably think they have moral high ground

Oct. 25. 2012 By Chris Reed So Proposition 30 is built on a threat — raise sales taxes on everyone

Winning idea for CA GOP: A right-to-work initiative

Dec. 6, 2012 By John Seiler California Republicans seeking to get back in the game should look to Michigan. The

‘Jungle primary’ effects could doom AB32’s renewal

California’s shift to “jungle primaries” in which the top two candidates advance regardless of party hasn’t resulted in significant changes