ABC’s ‘What Would You Do’ Takes Absurd View of SB 1070

By Neil Rosekrans

If you haven’t seen ABC’s new ‘What Would You Do’ series, it’s a hidden camera show that stages contentious scenarios to see how the public will react.  Picture a young male informing his overbearing mother that he’s gay…in a crowded hipster cafe, no less.   You get the idea.

In a recent episode, ABC host John Quinones sets up his actors, an overzealous rent-a-cop and a Latino man, in a Tucson carne asada restaurant to stage an immigration shakedown.

Rent-a-Cop to Latino Actor: Excuse me, sorry to interrupt.  If I could see some identification.  You don’t belong here.

Rent-a-Cop:  I just wanna kinda make sure you’re legal.

Latino Actor: Legal?

Rent-a-Cop: Yeah, just legal.  That’s all.

Latino Actor: Legal?

Rent-a-Cop: Just show me your ID.

Latino Actor: I’m not going to show you my ID.

At this point the restaurant erupts and chases the rent-a-cop out the door.

The whole scenario is as offensive as it is absurd.  Yet Quinones says that this is exactly what might happen under Arizona’s new immigration law, SB 1070.  Apparently, Quinones didn’t read the new law before spouting off on it.  But that’s OK, because neither did Eric Holder or Janet Napolitano.

First of all, rent-a-cops don’t have the authority to check anyone’s immigration status.  It’s a tool strictly for actual law enforcement to use only during a lawful stop, detention or arrest.  In other words, police officers can’t just wander around, harass folks and hope to nab an illegal immigrant.

Second, the law specifically prohibits racial profiling.  Race, color and national origin are factors that cannot be used in gauging an individual’s legal status.

And third, US District Judge Susan Bolton issued an injunction last July and blocked the most controversial parts of the law from even going into effect.

I wonder how viewers at home would react if it were filmed along the border fence and a Border Patrol agent asked to see some guy’s ID.  That’s based on reasonable suspicion, is it not?  What’s the big difference between that and reasonable suspicion exercised during a traffic stop along a known human smuggling route?

It’s somewhat irrational how much attitudes shift the further the distance from the border.