Adding in or editing out references to immigration status

http://poynter.org/column.asp?id=58&aid=140153

Browsing around on Poynter today, I stumbled across this column that raises the issue of whether reporters should include immigration status along with articles, especially in the southwest when a lot of stories may include names with foreign last names. I thought this column, linked above, may be of particular interest, especially after today's discussion/reading of the St. Pete Times' article.
The answer to the question is all about relevancy. However, this relevancy can be hard to determine. According to the article, for example, if an immigrant was found to have been involved in a car accident due to DUI, and killed or seriously injured the other driver, it seems to not be necessary to mention the legal status of the driver since legal status and a horrific accident don't seem to have anything in common. But in the article, the writer says that legal status actually IS relevant because an illegal immigrant would in fact not be able to get a driver's license, which means the accident supposedly wouldn't have happened if that person weren't driving.
These two viewpoints create a challenge for editors too, in particular, since they are the ones having to double check and triple check for validity and relevancy when mentioning legal status. Especially in Arizona, with azcentral.com, where every story about immigrants brings rise to racist comments, it's important for editors to know when to go digging for this aspect of the story.