Those who expound that this nation's history was formed from the revolution of an exiled people, would now speak of exclusion and banishment. Proposition 187 seeks to curb illegal immigration by killing the availability of social services, public schoolin g, and medical care, save emergency services, to those "suspected" of being present here illegally. That's right, the authorities need only hold a suspicion of one's illegal status, and the great wheels of bureaucracy begin turning until you are ground ou t of the country. I did mention "authorities," did I not? If the Arizona initiative is anything like the California initiative (apparently, there will be some differences), an "authority" can range from the obvious Immigration and Naturalization Service ( INS) agent to a school teacher. What falls in between? The police officer on the beat, social service workers, welfare agents, school officials and administrators, and hospital personnel. What are these authorities authorized to do? They are required to d eny all benefits until the person is verified as "(1) a citizen of the United States; (2) an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident; (3) an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time." Should the so-called authority reasonably suspect an illegal status, that authority should not only deny service, but is compelled to notify that person of the apparent illegal status and inform them that they must obtain legal status or leave the United States! Wait, there's more! Furthermore, the aut hority must notify the state Attorney General and the INS. For public elementary and secondary schools, this reporting requirement includes not only the pupil, but the parent or guardian of the pupil.

What does all this mean? Should you be stopped by a traffic officer and that officer suspects that you are in this country illegally, he must inform you of his suspicion and require that you prove otherwise. In the event that you cannot, he must instruct you to obtain legal status or leave the country. From there, he must notify the state Attorney General and the INS of his suspicions. One could only imagine the inconvenience this could cause you. OK, maybe rolling through the stop sign was a little dange rous, but was deportation necessary? How about the grade school pupil who is suspected of being an illegal? How could one tell? Moreover, these suspicions spill over to the parents or guardians. The California proposition requires the school to continue t o provide services for ninety days to allow "an orderly transition to a school in the child's country of origin." If legal status is not determined, the school must disenroll the child. Of course, since the Attorney General and INS were notified, the chil d and the parents could be deported.

As you can see, this approach to controlling illegal immigration in this country is wrought with problems. What is a "reasonable suspicion?" And, how can we be sure this wide range of "authorities" will be consistently reasonable? We can't. We live in a m arketplace where job retraining has not kept pace with corporate downsizing and restructuring; the manufacturing base is no longer domestic, but global; and the political insider has lost touch with a constituency that feels so far on the outside that apa thy is the default position. This translates into the losers in the competitive game needing a scapegoat, and one of the many are the immigrants. When times were good and the economy was strong, the topic of immigration, much less illegal immigration, was but a footnote in a political stump speech. Well, times are hard, and the so-called immigrants hold those jobs once thought beneath the accomplished and sophisticated American worker. Something must be done. What was done in California is coming to Arizo na.

Luckily, the shortsightedness of Prop 187 has come to light. Enforcement of the proposition has been enjoined by the courts until the constitutionality of the provisions can be determined. Based on what the court has analyzed so far, many of the provision s either violate the constitution directly, or violate federal immigration law, which preempts any state law in this matter. As it stands, Proposition 187 in California is unlikely to hold up. This should be a lesson to Arizonans. Although many of the pro visions of the California initiative are already in Arizona statutes, i.e., noncitizens cannot receive state social and welfare benefits, the mean-spirited, protectionist nature of the initiative will only distract from the real problem. Economic stabilit y, here and in neighboring countries, will ultimately relieve the stress and burdens of immigration. Do not blame those who would do the same as the founding fathers of this country € find a better way.

David H. Benton is a second year law student and President of the Black Law Students Assocation. His column appears every other Thursday.