Filed Under:  Border Issues, Border Law Enforcement, Border Patrol

Arizona Ranchers, Lawmen React To Court’s SB 1070 Decision

June 27th 2012   ·   0 Comments

Credit: Courtesy http://www.cochise.az.gov
Above: A storm rolls in over the Huachuca Mountains in Cochise County, Ariz. The county shares 83.5 miles of the border with Mexico.

COCHISE COUNTY, Ariz. — The Supreme Court’s decision overturning key parts of SB 1070 was no surprise to some Arizona border residents. But they have a question, and it’s a sticking point: What is the U.S. going to do about border enforcement in their backyards?

Edith Lowell’s home is set back on a cattle ranch out in the hills west of Nogales, down a winding single-lane road in a place called Peck Canyon. Her family’s been here since the 1870s. Mexico, the border, is 12 miles away. Illegal immigration through her ranch was once rampant. That has calmed now.

“So what we have left now are the drug smugglers and of course, they’re the bad guys,” Lowell said.

There are other bad guys these days. Ripoff crews hunt drug mules here, looking to steal their cargo or their money. Bandits rob illegal immigrants in the wooded canyons and sweeping plains dotted with giant boulders.

In December 2010, U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was killed on her ranch.

So, yes, illegal immigration is down, and that’s good, but there are other problems.

“Well, we still have the drug smugglers. In fact, my husband was told a couple of weeks ago, ‘well, they’re leaving drugs in your junkpile again.’ They’ve moved back in here,” Lowell said.

She expected the Supreme Court to reject SB 1070. In fact, the bill was short-lived. U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton blocked its key provisions one day before the state immigration law was set to take effect in 2010. So Lowell figured, if the lower court didn’t like it, why would the Supreme Court? But given the context of her life out here, Lowell still has major security concerns that aren’t being addressed.

“What that makes me think is if the Feds have the authority, let them do a better job,” she said.

Did SCOTUS Get SB 1070 Right?

We'd like to hear your thoughts. Did the Supreme Court make the right decision regarding SB 1070?

We’d like to hear your thoughts. Did the Supreme Court make the right decision regarding SB 1070?

Susan Clark Morales lives ten miles south of Lowell’s ranch. This is cattle country, and Morales’ ranch abuts the border line out where giant walls don’t exist and it’s not always easy to tell which country’ you’re standing in.

“We’ve had our house broken into. My home was broken into 7 times in about a 3 year period. And that was the same house where I was raised,” Morales said.

She compares it to living in a crime-ridden big city. Bars on the windows, security doors, an alarm that goes straight to the Border Patrol station.

She supported Arizona’s SB 1070 law, but not for the reasons most supporters backed it.

“Well, the irony of it is, Arizona is just trying to enforce the laws that the federal government has already had in place. Okay? So when you ask, should Arizona have done that, on its own or what is it trying to prove, I don’t see how that’s a big question,” she said.

“The question is, why isn’t the federal government enforcing its own laws?”

Cochise County Sheriff Larry Dever agrees with that. He’s one of the few Arizona law enforcement officials who backed SB 1070. In fact, his deputies enforced federal immigration law years before the current political fight began. He says he had no choice. For a ten year period, Cochise County felt overrun with illegal immigrants.

“It’s not hard in our environment. We don’t have a large illegal alien population in Cochise County. We’re a gateway, a fountainhead, a floodgate, sometimes. But there’s nothing to hold them here, they’re just trying to get through,” Dever said.

So he was pleased with the court’s decision to keep allowing police to ask the immigration status of people they stop.

“Well, we’ve been doing that down on the border for 36 years,” the sheriff said.

There are other law enforcement officials down here in Southern Arizona who are more bothered by that provision. Tony Estrada is sheriff of Santa Cruz County, also along the border.

A Brief History Of SB 1070

More stories, documents & multimedia on the controversial Arizona anti-immigration law.

More stories, documents & multimedia on the controversial Arizona anti-immigration law.

“I was kind of hoping they would find that unconstitutional. Unfortunately, it didn’t happen so we’re going to have to work with it,” Estrada said.

He has moral and professional objections to the policy, but that does not mean he won’t enforce it now that Arizona has the court’s permission to use it.

“No, I would definitely not advise my deputies not to enforce the law. I will advise them to use a lot of common sense,” he said.

Both lawmen say the Border Patrol presence in their counties is so prevalent, they expect they won’t need to worry about the sole provision of SB 1070 that survived the court.

The interior of the country, they say — places like Phoenix, Colorado, Alabama — will be another matter.

Incoming search terms:

  • SOUTHERN BORDER OVERRUN

Related Posts:

Tags:  , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

By

Readers Comments (0)





Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

What is 6 + 6 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:
IMPORTANT! To be able to proceed, you need to solve the following simple math (so we know that you are a human) :-)

BEWARE

There may be graphic photographs that accompany some articles in the body of this report. It is not our intention to sensationalize. We include these photos in order to give to you, the American public, a clearer understanding of the seriousness of the situation we are in.

Polls

Why do you think the drug cartels are more violent in Mexico than the U.S.A.

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Loading

Facebook



Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of The US Open Borders usopenborders.com, its editorial staff, board or organization. Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to The US Open Borders. The US Open Borders is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations. The US Open Borders is not supported by any political organization. The US Open Borders is a non-profit, non-partisan research and educational initiative. Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by The US Open Borders is copyrighted. US Open Borders goal is the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.