June 25, 2012

Andrew Butler

The Supreme Court just announced the brunt of its decision about Arizona’s controversial immigration law. Some actions the law required of law enforcement were deemed in contradiction with federal law, and others were not. Having read the list of items upheld vs overturned has led many Americans to ask, “What?” To make things clearer I have rewritten the basic results to describe how things are gonna go down in Arizona post Supreme Court ruling.

- Brown people with accents DO NOT have to obtain or carry around papers proving they aren’t one of those sneaky job-stealing Mexicans who penetrated the US border one dead white baby at a time. HOW WILL WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUSPICIOUS BROWN PEOPLE WITH ACCENTS AND EVIL BROWN PEOPLE WITH ACCENTS? We will have trust them, even though they are BROWN AND HAVE ACCENTS.

- It will NOT be a state criminal offense for a brown person who has shat on the dignity of our great land by stepping foot on it without permission to attempt to survive in our superior country by mowing lawns, washing dishes, folding laundry, picking up heavy things, frying things, or other jobs only fit for brown people with accents or maybe college students if they studied something gay like theater or art. THESE EVIL TRESPASSERS’ GREATEST HOPE, TO MAKE AN HONEST LIVING DOING DIFFICULT WORK WHITE PEOPLE DON’T WANT, IS NOT PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

- Police are NOT allowed to arrest someone without a warrant if their only reason for arresting them is that the person in question is brownish with an accent, is named Juan, is eating a taco that is not from taco bell, doesn’t speak English, doesn’t own land, doesn’t cry during Pixar films, doesn’t know every word to Don McLean’s “American Pie” AND Miley Cyrus’ “Party in the USA,” has a squinty look about them, or knows what a tele novella is. THESE REASONS, THOUGH DAMNING SIGNS OF EVIL INTENT, ARE NOT REASON ENOUGH TO ARREST A PERSON IN THESE UNITED STATES. 

-If police are already questioning someone because they may have killed someone, stole something, trespassed, hurt someone or something, littered, driven under the influence, disrupted the peace, gathered without a permit, jaywalked, etc, they legally MUST (WHETHER THEY WANT TO OR NOT) question that person’s immigration status IF AND ONLY IF that person is named Jose, speaks with accent, is any discernible shade of brown, knows Spanish, is eating a burrito, likes soccer more than NASCAR, hasn’t been to the Olive Garden at least once this month, works in a kitchen or near a lawn, knows who Selena is, is unable to locate the nearest Starbucks, or seems to know an awful lot of people who fit the previous descriptions. IF THEY SEEM TO BE DOING ONE THING THAT IS ILLEGAL AND THEY ARE BROWN WITH AN ACCENT PROBABLY THEY THEY WADED THROUGH THE BLOOD OF AMERICAN VIRGINS TO REACH OUR HALLOWED LAND WITHOUT PERMISSION SO THE POLICE MUST QUESTION THEIR IMMIGRATION STATUS. (maybepolicewillenforcetinylawsasanexcusetocheckuponbrownpeoplewithaccents-thatwouldbetotallylegalstillandprobablyforthebestsincetheyarebrownand-mightbetryingtoconsumeourchildrenandtheirjobs)

I hope that cleared up the new rulings for everyone. I can’t wait to hear the ObamaCare ruling on Thursday!