It's especially prevalent in the Arizona law whereby people only look at the immediate "you can deport illegals" but don't see how cops can use that to target American citizens and exploit them.

It will be hell freezes over (an expression .. i don't believe in hell) when normal people like me will be locked up because of some mis-application of any terrorism laws.

Really? Well then Beelzebub must have enjoyed his day of ice-skating. Let Maher Arar tell you all about it:

Maher Arar is a 34-year-old wireless technology consultant. He was born in Syria and came to Canada with his family at the age of 17. He became a Canadian citizen in 1991. On Sept. 26, 2002, while in transit in New York's JFK airport when returning home from a vacation, Arar was detained by US officials and interrogated about alleged links to al-Qaeda. Twelve days later, he was chained, shackled and flown to Syria, where he was held in a tiny "grave-like" cell for ten months and ten days before he was moved to a better cell in a different prison. In Syria, he was beaten, tortured and forced to make a false confession.

During his imprisonment, Arar's wife, Monia Mazigh, campaigned relentlessly on his behalf until he was returned to Canada in October 2003. On Jan. 28, 2004, under pressure from Canadian human rights organizations and a growing number of citizens, the Government of Canada announced a Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar.

On September 18, 2006, the Commissioner of the Inquiry, Justice Dennis O'Connor, cleared Arar of all terrorism allegations, stating he was "able to say categorically that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offence or that his activities constitute a threat to the security of Canada."

Of course, the U.S. has yet to admit any wrongdoing or offer any compensation or apology to Mr. Arar.

Yes, of course.

Would Obama sign the bill into law if it passed or veto it?

Yes, of course. Why do you even ask?

Lawyers are not the enemy. Nor are we a danger.

as long as you continue to challenge the executive's right to detain without due process; order the murder (give it any pretty name you want, it comes down to murder) of anyone, anywhere; authorize the introduction of evidence gained by use of illegal methods (read: torture).

yes, you most certainly are the enemy, and a danger to the "Seven Days in May" government we seem to have acquired.

Would the Democrats be so knuckle-headed as to pass it?

that you even feel the need to ask, tells me you already know the answer.

Would Obama sign the bill into law if it passed or veto it?

again, that you feel the need to ask, gives you your answer.

The famous "slipping slope" argument. Look at history. Using your argument, prohibition will lead to banning of anything objectionable. What happened? It was reversed.

Using some extreme extrapolation of the law to "scare" people into opposing the current one is as intellectually corrupt as using fear to further other political agendas.

Wow.