This should be embarrassing for KVOA. They're running a poll asking whether or not people support SB1070, and their information accompanying the poll is outdated and inaccurate.
Here's part of KVOA's "summary" of the bill:
During the course of a lawful stop, when practicable, law enforcement has the right to inquire about your immigration status if they have reasonable suspicion that you are an in the US illegally . . .
That's wrong twice. The term "lawful stop" was taken out almost immediately, replaced by "stop, detention or arrest." How can they use old language when that change has been the subject of so much discussion and controversy?
And it's not that law enforcement has "the right to inquire about your immigration status" if there is reasonable suspicion. Officers are required to inquire:
. . . a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status or the person . . .
"Shall" is an imperative. The law is so imperative, as a matter of fact, if a city tells its officers it has discretion about asking or not asking about immigration status, it opens itself up to a lawsuit.
I really think this is a case of ignorance compounded with laziness. The irony is, KVOA's inaccurate explanation has a link to the bill itself, but apparently no one bothered to check the language of the bill -- reporters are supposed to be good with language, right? -- before writing the summary.