Immigration Fallacy The Existential Fallacy Behind Arizona's Thesis

Immigration Fallacy The Existential Fallacy Behind Arizona's Immigration Policy

Few issues currently featured in American public debate are clouded by as much emotional bias, invective and distortion as that of immigration reform. Particularly as this concerns America's shared border with Mexico, immigration is a discussion which carries significant political ramification, clear racial overtones and distinctions in ideology where American openness is concerned. As a result, many political figures have been moved to comment or drive policy on the issue-based less on the support of fact than on the employment of inflammatory rhetoric. And quite frequently, this rhetoric is presented with little concern for the logical fallacies which may underlie is basic formative claims. Rarely has this been evidenced with more vitriol or determination than in the state of Arizona over the last several years. In the context of our discussion, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is particularly noted for her steady employment of logical fallacy as a way of engendering support from those voters who share her hostility toward Hispanic immigration.

The central fallacies in the governor's position extend from the claims used to support and, subsequently, to defend the controversial state-based bill called SB1070. This was a bill which the governor aggressively pushed into passage through State Senate that would give law enforcement officers...

...

A bald-faced legal standard asking officers to engage in racial profiling, the policy would be underscored by a key syllogistic fallacy that the federal government and specifically the administration of President Obama, had created an immigration crisis in need of this type of response. Rather than addressing the core issues relating to the drug wars at our borders, the racial implications of her stance or the real economic figures that describe our immigration picture, Brewer employed a strategy of misdirection. Seizing on the hostility of conservatives in her home state against the president -- also extending at least partially from racial tensions -- Brewer would frame the discourse on immigration according to the failure of the president to act on their behalf.
Accordingly, Biggers (2011) reports that "Brewer argues that the Obama administration has intentionally allowed an immigration crisis to spiral out of control on the U.S.-Mexico border. When President Felipe Calderon from Mexico addressed a joint session of Congress and criticized Arizona for SB 1070, Brewer could not believe that a foreign leader was actually allowed to criticize the United States of America. 'I had to wonder where our country was going under Obama,' she writes. 'It started to dawn on me that this president…

Sources Used in Documents:

Works Cited:

Biggers, J. (2011). How Arizona wrote the GOP's immigration platform. Salon.com.


Cite this Document:

"Immigration Fallacy The Existential Fallacy Behind Arizona's" (2012, January 26) Retrieved April 19, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/immigration-fallacy-the-existential-fallacy-77621

"Immigration Fallacy The Existential Fallacy Behind Arizona's" 26 January 2012. Web.19 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/immigration-fallacy-the-existential-fallacy-77621>

"Immigration Fallacy The Existential Fallacy Behind Arizona's", 26 January 2012, Accessed.19 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/immigration-fallacy-the-existential-fallacy-77621

Related Documents

Arizona Immigration Law SB1070 This work in writing examines Arizona's SB1070 Immigration Law and how this law has impacted the state of Arizona, the citizens of Arizona, and the U.S. In its entirety as well as the conflicting views on SB1070 and seeks to determine is SB1070 is adherent to the tenants of federal immigration law. Arizona Immigration Law SB1070 The objective of this work in writing is to briefly explain Arizona's SB1070

The hypothesis that certain black persons viewed racism as an all round phenomenon that occurs in many forms was tested. Other black persons viewed and experienced racism in many other different ways. This suggested that the act of racism is more in the mind of the specific victim than the actual fact in the objective reality. This highlighted out the fact that if white individuals were in the same

Arizona SB 1070 On January 13, 2010 Senator Russell Pearce, representative of District 18 in Mesa, introduced Senate Bill 1070 which stated as it's intent to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of the state of Arizona. In support of this goal, the state would seek to enforce all federal immigration laws in an effort to deter "the unlawful entry and presence of illegal aliens and economic activity by illegal

Though the specter of racism will continue to underscore the current controversy, many Democratic politicians will avoid making such strong accusations at such an early stage. The mid-term elections are approaching and the Democrats want to preserve or increase their thin majority in Congress. The Democrats are poised to achieve important objectives such as financial regulation and energy policy in the coming year. An eruption of racial tensions at this

Arizona's new immigration law is a fundamental violation of the principles of the Civil Rights Act of 1994, and existing federal non-discrimination legislation. The law enables police to randomly stop and demand proof of citizenship from people who the authorities think are illegal aliens. This law will obviously have a disproportionate impact upon individuals of non-white heritage, particularly Hispanics. The law "would make the failure to carry immigration documents a

They point out that neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court has precluded the States or localities from enforcing the criminal provisions of immigration law. Because the enforcement of the criminal provisions of Federal Law has not been expressly prohibited by the Constitution, it would be reserved to the states respectively. According to the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,