Arizona outcry travels path of Prince William County

What's happening in Arizona is exactly what happened in Prince William, but board Chairman Corey Stewart says outcry and criticism shouldn't dissuade the state from going forth with tough new immigration laws.

"Essentially, we were the test case for what's going on in Arizona," said Stewart, R-At-Large. "I can tell you the intensity they're facing is exactly the intensity the board of county supervisors faced, and it came from several corridors … that essentially tried to threaten the county."

In late April, Arizona's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, signed into law new immigration policy giving local law enforcement the authority "to reasonably determine the immigration status of a person involved in a lawful contact [with officials]," according to the summary sheet of S.B. 1070 posted on the state's website. The lawful contact clause in particular caused concern among civil rights activists who foresaw worst-case scenarios where police would engage in racial profiling and de-mand paperwork proving legal status from, say, pedestrians based on skin color.

Prince William County's immigration policy, by contrast, states that police broach the issue of legal presence only after "physical custodial arrest," according to a June 2008 press release from the police department on the main points of enforcement procedures.

Brewer, in an April 23 statement, said the state's new policy was lawful -- and adopted from existing federal statutes -- and that she "would not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Ari-zona."

The response from the White House to Arizona has been less than supportive, and President Obama pre-dicted before the bill was even signed into law that it would undermine America's basic view of fairness and justice.

Criticisms from the public have not waned much in the days since the bill's passage. On May 5, reports were that the Phoenix Suns basketball team was protesting the policy by donning Los Suns jerseys. Tucson and Flagstaff city councils, meanwhile, announced intent to sue over the policy.

The question now: Will the heat coming from Arizona ultimately cool Prince William's policy?

That's doubtful, Stewart said.

"We were told we were going to get sued, that what we were doing was unlawful, it would lead to an explosion of racial profiling cases," he said. "And you know what? Not one case ever held. As of about one month ago, the jail had handed to [Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials] 2,350 illegal aliens [since 2007] who had committed crimes in the county. It's even more now."

Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch -- a nonprofit organization in Washington that helped Prince Wil-liam develop its immigration policy -- said he believes most Arizona residents are behind the law.

"I think Arizona's law is going to result in more enforcement, not less," he said. "Arizona overwhelmingly supports the law and that reflects the view of most Americans and people who want border control."

Not all agree, however, and characterize both county and Arizona immigration laws as discriminatory policies that will ultimately crumble.

"What we saw here in [the county] is the same kind of unconstitutional, anti-immigrant overreach that we're now seeing in Arizona. [It's] a far-reaching law that is probably unconstitutional and impossible to enforce," said Pete Frisbie, chairman of the Prince William County Democratic Party, in an e-mail. "The result here was that the Board of Supervisors was forced to roll-back its original resolution to something much weaker … I believe we will ultimately see a similar result in Ari-zona."

Staff writer Cheryl Chumley can be reached at 703-530-3903.