This article will be as objective as possible and will make a logical argument regarding SB1225.

Some have heard that this bill stops rape, some have heard that it is pro-immigrant, some have heard that it goes after non-criminal immigrants, others may have heard that this bill “saves all the cute little kittens out there.”

I will provide evidence that this bill can be misused, and provide evidence that Kyrsten Sinema knows about this misuse.

Put aside anything you have heard, and let’s look at what the bill actually says, not what the author or opponents think of it.

The blue box is the EXACT text of SB1225 and uses the definitions given in ARS 13-2319 which is shown below. Note that the definition of “human smuggling” only refers to citizenship status.

We all have an image of what a “drop house” and “human smuggling” mean.

You may think of people stuffed in a hidden compartment being transported across the border along with bales of marijuana, and taken to a drop house filled with guns and a bunch of immigrants being held against their will.

Does SB1225 apply to these types of crimes? YES (but keep reading).

First of all, it’s not SB1225 that criminalizes this, but ARS 13-2319. This statute was a result of Jonathan Paton’s “coyote” law. He wanted to crack down on coyotes, people that smuggle immigrants into this country, and this law was a result of it.

Does Paton’s law apply to what we think of as human smuggling and drop houses? YES.

So do the tools already exist for law enforcement to crack down on this type of criminal activity? Instead of a blogger’s answer, let’s hear what Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik says about SB1225. He says it is not needed, and that they already have all the laws they need.

Why would someone like Sheriff Arpaio love SB1225 and someone like Sheriff Dupnik say it is not needed? Are these Sheriff’s really that different when it comes to immigration?

More to the point, can SB1225 be used for evil?

What exactly does SB1225 do?

The author of SB1225 says that it took two years to draft this bill, but all it does is that take existing law and increase the penalty for it, from a class 4 to a class 3 felony.

Also keep in mind that a lot has changed in Arizona over the last two years dealing with immigration and law enforcement.

What does SB1225 make into a class 3 felony? Drop houses, which are defined as used for human smuggling as defined in ARS 13-2319.

The next step we will take is important! Under the law, it is not what your mind conceives of what human smuggling or drop houses is, or what the intent of the bill’s author is. It is what the bill says that matters in a court of law.

Now let us explore what exactly “human smuggling” is:

ARS 13-2319
“Smuggling of human beings” means the transportation, procurement of transportation or use of property or real property by a person or an entity that knows or has reason to know that the person or persons transported or to be transported are not United States citizens, permanent resident aliens or persons otherwise lawfully in this state or have attempted to enter, entered or remained in the United States in violation of law.

Now, with an open mind, look at the wording of “human smuggling” above. Is there any reference to being held against the person’s will, or rape, or sexual assault, or even other illegal activity taking place?

NO.

The only thing that is required in the law above is that the person being transported is an undocumented person! That’s it!

Does this apply to evil rapists and coyotes? YES.

Does it also apply to giving a family member from Mexico a ride to the store? YES.

How about if an immigrant is dying out in the desert, and you give them a ride to safety. Are you committing a felony in Arizona? YES.

What if your neighbor of 9 years with 3 US-born children needs a ride to pick up a car part at the junkyard? If you give them a ride, are you now “human smuggling”? YES.

This is the problem with the bill, and I know of cases where the law has been applied to “human smugglers” that are not really what you think of as human smugglers. It is people giving rides to family members or close friends who are undocumented.

Once you drop the person off at your house, or a friend’s house, or the apartment where they are staying, that is now a drop house under Arizona law.

Does ARS 13-2319 apply to all of these and make them all felonies. YES.

And Kyrsten Sinema knows it.

Proof that Kyrsten Sinema knows about misuse of ARS 13-2319

In the past Kyrsten Sinema was awesome, and she still sometimes is.

She gives awesome speeches against Ron Gould’s SB1308, and is still fighting against other anti-immigration bills. This is why SB1225 is so controversial.

If SB1225 was written by a Republican and had 10 Republican co-sponsors, the likes of Antenori and Ron Gould supporting it, we would all easily be opposed to it, including Kyrsten Sinema.

But since this is Sinema’s bill we are conflicted. Arizona 2011 is NOT the year for more immigration bills, especially with the budget so unbalanced and schools facing 20% cuts next year.

What is even more troubling is that the pre-2011 awesome Sinema would have argued against 2011 Sinema’s anti-immigrant bill. Here is the proof.

Complaint filed by Kyrsten Sinema against these “human smuggling” bills… now she has authored her own with Ron Gould.

It appears that all these Latino organizations AND Kyrsten Sinema are mad that ARS 13-2319 is being misused by Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas!

They are all suing Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas, among others… I wonder what for, but I bet it will be anti-immigrant. Else why would all these Latino organizations be on board?

The complaint above that has Kyrsten Sinema and a bunch of Latino organizations as plaintiffs alleges that Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas are misusing ARS 13-2319 against the intent of the writers of the law to go after coyotes.

But think about this logically. You saw the definition of “human smuggling” above. It is in no way limited to just coyotes, but anyone who is has an undocumented person in their car.

How did this play out? From the Tucson Weekly:

In 2005, Paton pushed through a law that created stiff new penalties for human traffickers who smuggle people across the border.

When the bill was heard in committee, critics warned that it would allow police to arrest not only coyotes who smuggle immigrants for profit, but also anyone who drove around a friend or relative. In response, Paton insisted that it was narrowly targeted at smugglers. In the end, the bill was one of the few immigration measures signed into law by then-Gov. Janet Napolitano.

But after it became law, then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, the controversial Republican who is now running for Arizona attorney general, began using the bill to charge illegal immigrants with conspiring to smuggle themselves into the country. The prosecutions faced a legal challenge, but courts ruled that Thomas was on solid legal ground with his use of the statute.

They say history repeats itself. All you have to do is substitute “Kyrsten Sinema” for “Paton”, “2011″ for “2005″, and “Three Sonorans and state senator Steve Gallardo” for “critics”, and “Gov. Brewer” for “Gov Napolitano” in the above article and what you get is:

In 2011, Kyrsten Sinema pushed through a law that created stiff new penalties for human traffickers who smuggle people across the border.

When the bill was heard in committee, Three Sonorans and state senator Steve Gallardo warned that it would allow police to arrest not only coyotes who smuggle immigrants for profit, but also anyone who drove around a friend or relative. In response, Sinema insisted that it was narrowly targeted at smugglers. In the end, the bill was one of the few immigration measures signed into law by Gov. Brewer.

But after it became law, then-Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, the controversial Republican who is now running for Arizona attorney general, began using the bill to charge illegal immigrants with conspiring to smuggle themselves into the country. The prosecutions faced a legal challenge, but courts ruled that Thomas was on solid legal ground with his use of the statute.

The reason this will play out exactly the same way is because ARS 13-2319 remains UNCHANGED!

The only thing SB1225 does is increase the penalty to a class 3 felony for violations of ARS 13-2319. The abuses above, from the complaint from pre-2011 Kyrsten Sinema, can be used against 2011 Sinema and SB1225.

The mathematics of human smuggling under Arizona law

The definition of “human smuggling” which also affects the definition of “drop house” under Arizona is WAY TOO VAGUE.

From a set theory point of view, the problem with ARS 13-2319, which was also the basis of Sinema’s complaint against it, was that the definition can apply to others besides coyotes.

Just look at the definition. It simply says transporting an undocumented person, and a place that facilitates that is a drop house. The goal is to go after the blue dot above, the “bad people” but the definition allows you to go after anyone in the bigger circle.

And this is what Sheriff Arpaio and Andrew Thomas have done, and Kyrsten Sinema knows this and the complaint above proves it.

So what does SB1225 do? The figure above still applies, but now to go after the blue dot, the coyotes, smugglers, and rapists, the penalty is now a class 3 felony, BUT THIS APPLIES TO THE WHOLE CIRCLE.

As the Tucson Weekly article above showed, the courts actually used ARS 13-2319 to defend Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Arpaio against Kyrsten Sinema, one of the plaintiffs, complaint.

She knows this law is being misused by law enforcement, and now she is increasing the penalty.

So when she says her bill will go after these evil people (in the blue dot), she is right. But it also goes after other innocent people. It is dropping an atomic bomb on a community rather to take out one house, and the radioactive after-effects poison the community for years to come.

Ron Gould, author of the 14th Amendment bills, is a sponsor of SB1225. Can it really be a “pro-immigrant” bill?

Here are some other questions for supporters of SB1225:

This bill has 10 Republican co-sponsors, people like Frank Antenori and Ron Gould (author of the 14th amendment bills). It has ZERO Democrat co-sponsors. It has already been voted AGAINST by the Latino senators in committee, which is made up of Steve Gallardo.

There is no Latino organization supporting this bill, and Sinema calls this bill “pro-immigrant” but yet where are the immigrant organizations supporting this? Those members of SOMOS America that joined her in her complaint above are all against SB1225.

Sinema was against the misuse of ARS 13-2319 and filed a complaint against that misuse, but now she is making that misuse worse by “giving law enforcement more tools” to get “tough on immigration.”

That’s from her press release. The headline was that Sinema introduces a bill that gets “tough on immigration.”

This goes against Andrei Cherny’s vision of stopping the scapegoating of immigrants and embracing them instead. It is also contradictory to admit that your bill gets “tough on immigration”, that it gives law enforcement like Sheriff Arpaio more tools, and then claim it is “pro-immigrant” without any Latino support.

Furthermore, Kyrsten Sinema quotes the recent “human smuggling” epidemic affecting Arizona. Here is where the negative feedback cycle begins.

ARS 13-2319, since 2005, has allowed to police to arrest innocent people and immigrants for human smuggling. So guess what happens to the reports and counts of “human smuggling”? They skyrocket!

And it all has to do with the definition of smuggling. Giving a family member a ride to the store and get pulled over by Border Patrol? Human Smuggling!

An undocumented person forges or uses false information to get a job or an apartment? Drop house! Forgery!

Russell Pearce and Sheriff Arpaio, soon to be relics of Arizona’s first century of statehood.

And now Sheriff Arpaio has more power to crack down on huge circle above, and actually doing so diverts attention and resources away from the blue dot of interest.

Is it really “pro-immigrant” to divert resources from going after the coyotes, and allowing Sheriff Arpaio to go after families and other non-criminal immigrants just living day to day, but without their citizenship papers?

This is the danger of SB1225. Any bill that Sinema claims to be “pro-immigrant” can certainly get the endorsement of Isabel Garcia, of SOMOS America, of Border Action Network, or of other Latino senators.

But it doesn’t.

2011 is NOT the year to be passing any “tough on immigration” bills with Russell Pearce in charge and with Republican support needed to pass bills.

You will have to make the right-wing happy, people like Ron Gould to support your bill, and that can only lead to no good.

Would you support an immigrant bill sponsored by Antenori, Ron Gould, and Linda Gray? Most definitely not! But somehow if you learn that Sinema is the primary sponsor, it somehow becomes okay?

It should not be a felony to transport family members and friends who are undocumented. The application of SB1225 is way to0 general and will affect a bigger circle beyond the circles of smugglers and rapist it is “intended” to go after. It is also naive to ignore the fact that when one gives law enforcement more power, one is giving the likes of Sheriff Arpaio and Sheriff Babeu more power, and we already know how they feel about immigrants.

Better law enforcement like Sheriff Dupnik says no thank you, this bill is not needed.

The most dangerous thing about SB1225 is that it will pass. It has overwhelming support, which means that the greater than two-thirds majority of the house and senate, which is Republican, support it.

Sinema will get to pass a bill, will get to run ads saying she was “tough on immigration” when she runs for Congress, and an entire community now has to deal with a more powerful Sheriff Arpaio.

If you feel this bill does not affect you in any way, let me ask the blunt question. Is your skin brown? Do you have undocumented family or friends that you sometimes give rides to, that you invite to your house? SB1225 presents the possibility of being charged with a class 3 felony for giving loved ones a ride.

This is what makes this SB1225 evil. This word is my opinion, but I have used the words of the laws and complaints against the law by Sinema herself to make my point that it will be used against immigrants, and to me these attacks on human beings, usually the poorest amongst us, are evil and must stop!

I choose the pre-2011 Kyrsten Sinema over the 2011 “I love Russell Pearce” Sinema anyday. I hope the pre-2011 Sinema chooses to kill the 2011 anti-immigrant bill SB1225, a bill with overwhelming right-wing (and racist) support and no Latino support.

SB1225 is up for a vote this Tuesday. You can email the Democratic legislators by copying and pasting the list below and urging them all to Vote NO on SB1225!

bwheeler@azleg.gov, atovar@azleg.gov, msaldate@azleg.gov, dpatterson@azleg.gov, lpancrazi@azleg.gov, rmiranda@azleg.gov, emeyer@azleg.gov, dmccunedavis@azleg.gov, khobbs@azleg.gov, mheinz@azleg.gov, ahale@azleg.gov, sgonzales@azleg.gov, rgallego@azleg.gov, sfarley@azleg.gov, tchabin@azleg.gov, chcampbell@azleg.gov, barredondo@azleg.gov, lalston@azleg.gov, eableser@azleg.gov, paboud@azleg.gov, ocajerobedford@azleg.gov, sgallardo@azleg.gov, jjackson@azleg.gov, llandrum@azleg.gov, llopez@azleg.gov, rmeza@azleg.gov, dschapira@azleg.gov