'This Week' Transcript: Rahm Emanuel

If you listen to what Secretary of State Clinton said, she didn't say anything about racial profiling. What she said was is federal immigration policy essentially usurp state. So the question is, does this, you know, is this federal immigration policy? A court will determine that. And I go back and forth on this. I've gone back to the Constitution, and I read that immigration isn't in the Constitution, but it talks about invasion of forces, and at moment I'll think, yes, this does try to usurp the states -- the federal government, so it will be unconstitutional. Other times, I think, no, this is simply, you know, enforcement of the law. It says illegal immigrants, and we don't give passes for people who shoplift, so do we give passes for people violating this law? So I go back and forth on this.

But here's the interesting thing. Neither the president nor Secretary of State Clinton talked about racial profiling, which is the hot-button item which has gotten people all riled up. And the reason is because both of them probably read the statute, and I don't understand why they don't put that issue to rest, because that would certainly calm things down a bit.

What this statute does is it needs to be tested in court, and the Justice Department if it's going to sue, needs to sue fast, before it goes into effect, before we have problems, and that will be the end of July.

MARTIN: When you say put this issue to rest, I don't think I understand what you mean.

VAN SUSTEREN: The whole issue of racial...


MARTIN: ... not going to open the door to racial profiling? How can they do that? I...


MARTIN: ... I'm curious what you think they...


VAN SUSTEREN: I think they should make the statement because I think they let it sit out there, because I think that's why there are boycotts of the state, because that -- I think that, because everyone thinks that this is racial profiling. That's horrible, that's a very bad thing to do. We even have the Constitution talking about the importance of equal rights for people, and there should be no statute that has racial profiling, none. But they don't speak to it. And instead, they sort of let that issue sort of sit out there and -- and percolate out there.

MARTIN: But there's the law, and then they have their -- it's how the law is interpreted. I mean, the fact is that the law has barred people from using race in jury selection for how many decades, but it still is used. There was recently a study in -- of 11 Southern states that indicated that African-...


MARTIN: ... Americans were, excuse me, barred from juries at three times the rate of whites for reasons like, well -- and prosecutors were saying, well, because he had glasses...


VAN SUSTEREN: You and I don't disagree (INAUDIBLE). Get that. You and I do not disagree about that.

MARTIN: But the question is whether there are policies in place actually lead to it or not, whether the policies are so stated or not.


VAN SUSTEREN: No, but if you look at the statute itself, you read the statute and you read the words to the statute, people will take armed robbery and apply -- and they'll racial profile armed robbery, which doesn't speak about racial profiling. That is so horrible. That is so bad. You and I don't disagree about that.

Join the Discussion
blog comments powered by Disqus
You Might Also Like...