News & Press
Bright on Arizona Immigration Law: Confused and Contorted(MONTGOMERY, AL) – Over the past week and a half, Congressman Bobby Bright has had trouble clarifying his position on Arizona’s tough new immigration law. However, these attempts have only served to cloud the picture on where Bright actually stands on this issue. In a Washington Post article published last week, Bright indicated that he opposes the Arizona law because it would encourage racial profiling, saying the law “attacks our Constitution.” Perhaps realizing this position was out of touch with the conservative values of the Second District, Bright and his office went on a full court press trying to pretend that never happened, and expressing his newfound support for the law. “Like many other voters in the Second District, I have to scratch my head at these contortions,” said Martha Roby, Republican candidate for Alabama’s Second Congressional District. “Does Congressman Bright oppose the Arizona law and believe it ‘attacks our Constitution’ as he originally said? What happened in the last week to make him change his mind?” “I’ve been clear from the start,” said Roby. “I stand with the people of Arizona in support of this law. The federal government has failed to secure the border and enforce the law. Arizona is well within its rights to take action and address this growing problem.” “Our representative in Washington shouldn’t have to think twice about supporting something that enforces existing law,” said Roby. On the Montgomery City Council, Roby chaired the committee that drafted an ordinance punishing businesses that harbor illegal immigrants.
Bobby Bright voices his opposition to the Arizona immigration law in the Washington Post, saying the bill “attacks the Constitution:” “Speight, who queried the lawmaker on Arizona's new immigration law, explained later that he likes Bright because he is a ‘Republican masquerading as a Democrat.’… Yet that doesn't completely capture the congressman's profile. Bright said Arizona's new immigration law "attacks our Constitution" because, he says, it could encourage racial profiling.” (Amy Gardner, “Ala. congressman avoids perils of anti-government backlash,” The Washington Post, 7/13/10) Just hours later, Bright’s office sent out “An Update From Washington by Bobby Bright” about “cracking down on illegal immigration:” “No one -- especially the federal government -- should fault a state for attempting to alleviate a serious problem within its own borders, which is the intent of the Arizona law.” http://stephencrewsnews.com/?p=2109 Perhaps realizing he needed to further clarify his stance, a later version of the campaign update added the words “and I support it” to the above sentence: “No one -- especially the federal government -- should fault a state for attempting to alleviate a serious problem within its own borders, which is the intent of the Arizona law, and I support it.” (Email Newsletter from Congressman Bobby Bright, received Wednesday July 14) After a letter to the editor critical of his position, Bright wrote a response saying that his “sole concern” about the law had been addressed and he now fully supported the bill: “My sole concern with the Arizona law was about the possibility that it would lead to racial profiling. Nobody believes racial profiling is the solution to our illegal immigration crisis. Even the Arizona state legislature agreed and amended the bill to clarify that citizenship status should be checked only when an individual is stopped by police for legitimate, probable causes…The amendment took care of my Constitutional concerns about profiling and, therefore, I support the Arizona law.” (“Letter: U.S. Rep. Bobby Bright responds,” The Dothan Eagle, 7/22/10) The amendments Bright references were passed on April 30, 73 days prior to him voicing his concern in the Washington Post: “Gov. Jan Brewer on Friday signed a bill modifying Arizona's controversial new immigration law, saying it will ‘make it crystal clear and undeniable that racial profiling is illegal.’” (“Arizona governor signs bill revising new immigration law,” by Casey Newton and Ginger Rough, The Arizona Republic, 5/1/10) What changed over the last 10 days that made Bright change his mind? ### |
