it will hurt them by making them pay federally required wages and give Americans jobs? Cry me a river.

BIRMINGHAM, Ala (Reuters) - Civil rights groups on Friday filed a lawsuit challenging Alabama's new immigration law, described as the toughest in the nation by both critics and supporters.

The lawsuit says Alabama's law will subject both citizens and non-citizens to "criminal penalties and incarceration for innocent daily activities, such as giving a ride to a neighbor, hiring a day laborer, or renting a room to a friend."

The suit also says the law will deter children in immigrant families from enrolling in public schools. Alabama's law is unique in requiring public schools to determine, by review of birth certificates or sworn affidavits, the legal residency status of students upon enrollment.

Republican Governor Robert Bentley signed the crackdown into law in June, and it is set to take effect September 1.

Alabama joins Georgia, Arizona, Utah and Indiana in defending new immigration laws in federal court. Judges have blocked key parts of laws passed in those states.

"Alabama has brazenly enacted this law despite the clear writing on the wall: Federal courts have stopped each and every one of these discriminatory laws from going into effect," said Cecillia Wang, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants' Rights Project.

The coalition filing the class action lawsuit includes the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Alabama, National Immigration Law Center, Asian Law Caucus and Asian American Justice Center.

The legal challenge did not come as a surprise, and one of the law's sponsors said on Friday he is confident the Alabama law will hold up in court.

"It is important to note that our law seeks to protect immigrants who reside here legally while affecting only those who break our laws with their simple presence," said House Majority Leader Micky Hammon, a Republican from Decatur.

"We cannot turn a blind eye toward those who thumb their noses at our borders and our laws," he said in a statement.

Under the Alabama law, police must detain someone they suspect of being in the country illegally if the person cannot produce proper documentation when stopped for any reason.

It also would be a crime to knowingly transport or harbor someone who is in the country illegally. The law imposes penalties on businesses that knowingly employ someone without legal resident status. A company's business license could be suspended or revoked.

The law requires businesses to use a database called E-Verify to confirm the immigration status of new employees.



WWOOO - HOOOO GO ALABAMA!!!

lol... not that many americans in Florida...

Maybe because there are no jobs

i was just reading an article where an obama aide says jobs are not important in 2012.

No you weren't. At least not in any credible publication.
Pants on fire.

“[Y[ou know, we’re a long way from 2012. We’re a long way from knowing what’s going on in the world and exactly what the economy is and who are opponent is.

“I would make a general statement, though, because there is a lot of attention focused on the unemployment rate. The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly jobs numbers.

“In fact, those terms very rarely pass their lips. So it’s a very one-dimensional view. They view the economy through their own personal prism. You see, people’s — people’s attitude towards their own personal financial situation has actually improved over time. You know, they’re still concerned about the long-term economic future of the country, but it’s things like ‘My sister was unemployed for six months and was living in my basement and now she has a job.’

“There’s a — a ‘help wanted’ sign. You know, the local diner was a little busier this week. Home Depot was a little busier. These are the ways people talk about the economy. They don’t talk about it in the terms of Washington.

“And so their decision next year will be based upon two things, ‘Okay, how do I feel about things right now?’ and then, ultimately, campaigns are always much more about the future, and, ‘Who do I think has got the best idea, the best vision for where to take the country?’

“I would submit to you that a healthy percentage of Americans, far more than a majority, believe the president has a very sound vision for where the country needs to go.

“So, you know, people won’t vote based on the unemployment rate. They’re gonna vote based on, ‘How do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?’”

Ah, now I see what you're doing. Here's the remark in full context.

so i guess you agree that it needed to be said?

why didn't you post the whole article, and the comments with it?

David Plouffe, right or wrong, was describing what he thinks will be the critical factors in how people vote in 2012. He said nothing of the kind that you mischaracterized.



In Mingle style, the information is out there. Do your own homework. (When in Rome, do as the Romans do)