Where are we nationally in the polls in terms of support for Arizona’s law? Around 60 percent or so, yes?

Send this to an immigration fencesitter you know and love and let’s see if we can’t get it up to 70.

In a legal brief supporting one of the lawsuits, Mexico argued that the measure is unconstitutional and “raises substantial challenges to the bilateral diplomatic relations between Mexico and the U.S.”

More than 20 million Mexican workers, tourists and students were lawfully allowed into the United States throughout 2009, said the brief, and the government is worried Mexicans will be discriminated against because of racial profiling.

“Mexico is gravely concerned that (Arizona’s law) will lead to … detentions of Mexican citizens without regard to whether they have taken any actions or exhibited any behavior indicating they are guilty of a crime,” the brief said.

Elsewhere, they complain that the law empowers cops to stereotype based on, er, “foreign-ness” even though racial profiling is expressly prohibited. As for the boldfaced part, we’ve been over it a good two dozen times before but let’s go over it again: Per the statute, a cop first needs reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed before he can ask about immigration status. He can’t try to corral a Mexican-American family at Baskin-Robbins because they look “suspicious.” If you’re busted for something else, only then is legal status on the table.

Two other points. First, am I mistaken or don’t you need to bring some sort of identifying document with you to enter the U.S. from Mexico even for a day trip? From DHS’s page on border crossings:

Mexican Citizens – Mexican citizens including children must present a passport with a nonimmigrant visa or a laser visa border crossing card.

* Document requirements for most Mexican citizens, including children entering the United States, do not change under WHTI. See www.getyouhome.gov for more information.
* US-VISIT biometric procedures may apply to some Mexican citizens. Find out if US-VISIT applies to you.

Permanent residents are also required to carry their green card on them at all times — not according to Arizona law, but according to federal law. Why do I bring all this up? Because, as you may remember, the Arizona statute creates a presumption that someone is here legally if they produce any sort of federally-issued identification — like, say, a visa. Show the cop your ID and you can be on your way, in which case, why the Mexican government’s hand-wringing for its citizens who are here legally? Given the document requirements to cross the border, they’re more likely to have identification on them than a U.S. citizen is.

Second point: Amnesty shills love to scold conservatives for their poor PR skills, lamenting the “incendiary rhetoric” that poisons our national debate on this issue. How come we never hear, though, about the poisonous PR efforts of the Mexican government, which I’ll bet has created more amnesty opponents over the years than Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity combined? It’s astounding to me how cavalier they are about meddling in American attempts to solve a problem that’s a direct result of their own terrible governance, replete with tut-tutting about discrimination by Calderon when he visits the White House. Every time they make a move I get a little firmer in opposing amnesty, and I can’t be the only one — and the truly insane part is that they didn’t need to intervene this time at all. There are plenty of suits already pending against the statute; the DOJ itself will reportedly file suit next week. Jumping in here may play well at home but it only further alienates Americans, which makes their goal of amnesty that much less likely. Are they really this stupid?