Holder says Arizona law not racially motivated but could lead to slippery slope of profiling
By APSunday, May 9, 2010
Holder fears ’slippery slope’ of racial profiling
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric Holder said Sunday he does not think Arizona’s law cracking down on illegal immigrants is racially motivated but voiced concern that its enforcement could lead to racial profiling.
Holder said the U.S. has a national immigration problem that cannot be cured with a “state-by-state solution.”
The top U.S. prosecutor said he understands the frustration behind the Arizona law, but he warned during an appearance on ABC’s “This Week” that “we could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done.”
The law empowers police to question anyone they suspect of being in the country illegally, and that could lead to what some see as harassment of the state’s large Hispanic population.
Holder said the Justice Department was “considering all of our options,” including a lawsuit either on grounds that the Arizona law had pre-empted federal powers or was a violation of federal civil rights statutes.
Shortly after being picked for attorney general, Holder, who is black, said the country was a “nation of cowards” because it had failed to confront the issue of race.
Asked on NBC’s “Meet the Press” if his assessment still held, Holder said: “I think it’s changed a bit. I still don’t think we’re at a place where we need to be. I think that we need to talk to each other more about race and the racial things that divide us especially when one looks at the demographic changes that this nation is about to undergo.”
The 2010 census is expected to show a large increase in Hispanic population.
Tags: Arizona, Hispanics, North America, Race And Ethnicity, United States, Washington
|
May 9, 2010: 4:29 pm
I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case. I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO! Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them . |
Benito