Question about Immigration

[Canadian]

I have a question about illegal immigration and current attempts to curb it (specifically Arizon's new law). I could see some potential problems with this,but the question I have is.... Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?

[Robert Goren]

I have a question about illegal immigration and current attempts to curb it (specifically Arizon's new law). I could see some potential problems with this,but the question I have is.... Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?Because the people who employ them make large contributions to both parties. They are friends with prosecutors and Judges. It is easier to go after the immigrant. Even when they raid someplace the employers get off and often have the nerve to bitch about the raid. JMO

[bigmack]

Because the people who employ them make large contributions to both parties. They are friends with prosecutors and Judges. It is easier to go after the immigrant. Even when they raid someplace the employers get off and often have the nerve to bitch about the raid. JMO
Good thing you interject JMO in your posts as you're oftentimes in left field.

The days of an illegal walking into an HR Dept and getting a job cutting sausage or whatever have quickly come to an end.

Mexico is a mess. They come here because they were once deported and they're coming back to their families to find another job running drugs, cleaning or mowing a lawn.

[newtothegame]

Good post Mack...not too mention, this is only ONE apsect of the problem with illegals. Healthcare is another HUGE issue. Drugs, which Mack mentioned, is another...human trafficing...the list goes on and on. Laws, as I understand it, are already in place concerning the employment of illegals.
As is the case with most things in this topic...the LAWS ARE THERE! They just need enforcement.

[bigmack]

Good post Mack...not too mention, this is only ONE apsect of the problem with illegals. Healthcare is another HUGE issue. Drugs, which Mack mentioned, is another...human trafficing...the list goes on and on. Laws, as I understand it, are already in place concerning the employment of illegals.
As is the case with most things in this topic...the LAWS ARE THERE! They just need enforcement.
As you can imagine I know no shortage of 'under the tablers' (lLiving around here it's tough not to) Got my first call this past week from someone I met through someone and then again through someone. He called my biz an axed if I could arrange for someone to drive him over from TJ.

I feel part of the underground now and had a good laugh on the horn.

[Robert Goren]

Good thing you interject JMO in your posts as you're oftentimes in left field.

The days of an illegal walking into an HR Dept and getting a job cutting sausage or whatever have quickly come to an end.

Mexico is a mess. They come here because they were once deported and they're coming back to their families to find another job running drugs, cleaning or mowing a lawn. Not in Nebraska, they haven't. They must not have gotten that memo here. In the packing plants here, it is either the illegals or Somali refuges. The Somalis want prayer breaks, so guess who they hire.

[bigmack]

Not in Nebraska, they haven't. They must not have gotten that memo here. In the packing plants here, it is either the illegals or Somali refuges. The Somalis want prayer breaks, so guess who they hire.
Somalis rolled in Minnesota 'bout 11-12 years ago through some weird deal. I know, I was there at the time. Many ain't illegal.

As to the others, I heard there was too much heat from 4-5 years ago. You're probably seeing legals. There you go profiling.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_29_10_22_42_11.png

[skate]

Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?


I'm thinking along the lines of, big business, the gov. and the media, see many happy times with a BIG EMPloyee Reserve.

Keeps the cost down.

Saw this first hand in some big city growth areas. Las Vegas is the best example. Had 100 and some people waiting for a job "Always". The media was posting about the growth and not about the excessive build-up. That is to say, the positive growth was made very public thru PR people, all over the country, so as to bring in extra help, to keep wages down.

The country, as a whole, did the very same thing with South of the Border rubbish about "how the streets were lined with gold", so to speak.

Now, seems to me, since we have come to a point that the average worker cant afford things like Health Care etc. , due to the fact that the workers wages were kept so low, in comparison to gov. type workers (who do not produce), some light is shed on the topic of "who is gonna pay"?
Since much of the money, given to people from outside the country, was sent back into the country from which they came, hence the Gov. has finally gotten the boing-boing and who-da what-a... like what gives here and there.

Masquerade is over, time for lent (at best), maybe.

[Tom]

Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply?



Our governemnt -both parties - want illegals here. Bottom line. Neither party cares at all about America or it's citizens. They care only about themsleves and thier power. All are liars, all are thives, many are perverts. None are Americans.
If our founding Fathers were here today, they would shoot the sons of bitches on sight. King George was more of an American than anything crawling the streets of DC today.

[bigmack]

Noonan. Peggy Noonan.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_30_10_16_18_03.png
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_30_10_16_18_33.png
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/4_30_10_16_18_51.png

[fast4522]

We as a people have become soft as grapes, we ignore when they shit on us and we send them back to Washington for another term. We ignored McCain because he was 70 and most felt that he was too much like George W Bush and in doing so a real piece of work who now threatens to reinvent us into euro filth and sell every memory of the American way to the Bilderberg Group. You people think it is a scary thing that China is holding all the paper to our debt, because in reality the best is yet to come with American slavery. High unemployment for decades unless we treat this guy like Jimmy Carter, did you have fun during the peanut years? If we do not have responsible leadership dealing with our borders and say enough is enough then get a pillow and bend over.

[Show Me the Wire]

I have a question about illegal immigration and current attempts to curb it (specifically Arizon's new law). I could see some potential problems with this,but the question I have is.... Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?


First, the law does not make it illegal for a person to unlawfully cross the border. The law makes it a "crime" for someone to be physically present within Arizona's borders if they unlawfully crossed any border.

Second, Arizona has tough employer sanctions too.

[skate]

yeh, they just shot (wounded) a guard (boarder ?) in AZ.


Bring back Compean and Ramos, wadda ya think?

[skate]

nominate (nutshell) Noonan, NOW!

[kenwoodall2]

We can get rid of many illegals and their families just by enforcing no loitering laws in front of Lowe's, Home Depot, and some street corners in Ca against illegal workers and the taco truck!! :cool:

[Buckeye]

I have a question about illegal immigration and current attempts to curb it (specifically Arizon's new law). I could see some potential problems with this,but the question I have is.... Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?

yeah, and that would also mean other than Native American Indians: get out! In my opinion there are No "illegal immigrants" but I could be wrong. Where does it say give me your poor yearning to be free but not you?

[fast4522]

We are a people that are governed by the rule of law. Arizona is looking very attractive as a state that has good laws that serve the people who count and believe in the law.

[boxcar]

I have a question about illegal immigration and current attempts to curb it (specifically Arizon's new law). I could see some potential problems with this,but the question I have is.... Why don't they simply go after the people who employ them. Shouldn't they just make a law that employers must make sure the people they hire are actual citizens and enforce large fines of they do not comply? Wouldn't this pretty much take away the illegal job oppurtunities and thus lower the amount of people coming to an area for work?

Being that you raised this issue, permit me to address an aspect that is given virtually no media coverage. But the other day a caller into the Rush show brought this particular topic up because he's a business owner with first hand knowledge and experience in dealing with the crooks in the federal government.

But before Rush took that call, he played a montage of audio soundbites from virtually all the major news stations. Everyone of them were saying how this "show-me-your-papers" law in AZ was soooooo Nazi-like. There couldn't be anything more Nazi-like than some government agency demanding to see someone's "papers", i.e. I.D. This was soooo un-American, according to these moronic talking heads on the various news station -- even though they totally misrepresented what this law is all about!

The WH was no different in its mischaracterization of the law either. It just isn't the American way to demand to see someone's "papers". Now fast forward to the guy who called Rush.

He called to tell Rush that he's under fire from the government, as an employer, because he hired someone whose "papers" didn't check out, according to the SSA. The employee's SS number didn't match with his name! So, now the employer is upset, wondering if the feds are going to come after him for hiring an illegal alien because they have already questioned him on the matter. But he's even more frustrated than upset because he's trying to understand the obvious double standard concerning these illegals. If some government agency demands to see someone's papers, this is very un-American somehow. Yet the federal government has been requiring employers to demand "papers" from prospective employers forever -- yet, this practice isn't considered Nazi-like? How does this work? Why is this?

This is, yet, another classic example of corruption at the federal level. It seems the federal government sets one standard for its citizens, but a very different one for itself. On this forum I have often pointed out these conflicting standards. We have see this with the SS Ponzi scheme. We have seen it with the Income Tax system because taxpayers are presumed guilty of cheating or fraud until they can prove to the IRS otherwise, and this presumption runs counter to our criminal and even civil justice systems. We have been seeing this with the immigration problem because the federal government has refused to enforce its own laws; yet it has no compunction in insisting in the next breath that we're an ordered society grounded in the "rule of law" to which we "common folks" must adhere. These double standards cannot continue on indefinitely. At some point in time, the whole system is going to implode upon itself under the weight of its own corruption.

Boxcar

[JustRalph]

We can get rid of many illegals and their families just by enforcing no loitering laws in front of Lowe's, Home Depot, and some street corners in Ca against illegal workers and the taco truck!! :cool:

They tried that in a couple of cities and the city Councils shut it down due to Law Suits. They ordered the police to leave them alone

[skate]

ok, they gots to go, but Paaalease leave the tacos alone, thanks

[46zilzal]

We are a people that are governed by the rule of law. Arizona is looking very attractive as a state that has good laws that serve the people who count and believe in the law.
I will wager the first test case will rule it unconstitutional.

[bigmack]

I will wager the first test case will rule it unconstitutional.
Thank goodness someone here knows about the constitutionality of 1070.

Please, do inform us how this bill is unconstitutional?

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/waitingfingers.gif

[Robert Goren]

I will wager the first test case will rule it unconstitutional. I would not wager anything on how this Supreme Court will rule. After that ruling that corporations have the same free speech rights as people, anything goes with the Roberts court. JMO

[46zilzal]

I would not wager anything on how this Supreme Court will rule. After that ruling that corporations have the same free speech rights as people, anything goes with the Roberts court. JMO
That guy is a fascist piece of work isn't he...right out of a Grisham novel, The Appeal.

[46zilzal]

From the Atlanta Journal

http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2010/05/03/arizonas-immigration-law-is-constitutionally-troubling/?cxntfid=blogs_bob_barr_blog

Hopefully, the federal courts will quickly avail themselves of the opportunity to determine the constitutionality of this Arizona law. And hopefully, they will find its exceptionally broad grant of police detention powers to be unconstitutional. If not, it won’t be long before the same powers are sought and applied to other areas in which police agencies want to enhance their ability to detain and question individuals. Once released, this genie will not easily be returned to the bottle

[boxcar]

From the Atlanta Journal

http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2010/05/03/arizonas-immigration-law-is-constitutionally-troubling/?cxntfid=blogs_bob_barr_blog

Hopefully, the federal courts will quickly avail themselves of the opportunity to determine the constitutionality of this Arizona law. And hopefully, they will find its exceptionally broad grant of police detention powers to be unconstitutional. If not, it won’t be long before the same powers are sought and applied to other areas in which police agencies want to enhance their ability to detain and question individuals. Once released, this genie will not easily be returned to the bottle

Then if the court does, who would be the fascist? The court for overruling the will the people AZ people (who overwhelmingly want this law) or the people?

Also, answer the question that was put to you: What, in this law, makes you so certain it will be overturned?

Boxcar

[bigmack]

http://www.kfiam640.com/cc-common/mlib/616/05/616_1272920970.bmp

[boxcar]

I don't get it. Who is stopping them from returning to Mexico? They're FREE to leave anytime they want. Are they being held here against their will? :bang: :bang:

Boxcar

[fast4522]

The law is not unconstitutional and is more of a tool that is a enabler when other laws come into play. The demand for papers is only when other laws or ordnance are disobeyed. If you run a red light while driving, instead of just the ticket it could result in arrest and detention. Although I heard you need papers to have a license in Arizona. The United States Supreme court is unlikely to hear any argument on the law because of the way the law was crafted with its wording.

[skate]

The United States Supreme court is unlikely to hear any argument on the law because of the way the law was crafted with its wording.


SLOWdown4522;

Why do you say that?


Im not in disagreement, just asking. i want to sleep tonite also.

[JustRalph]

The law basically says you need probable cause to make contact, but once you make contact you are required in some cases to determine whether the party is legally in the country.

It is no different than the standard probable cause standard. The way I read it anyway.........lots of extra words in that law that basically say the same thing that several court decisions have said about probable cause over the years. Except this time there is a requirement to check whether you are an illegal alien or not.

Probable cause......... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

Probable causes can change with the weather....literally.

[bigmack]

Section 133 of IIRAIRA from 1996

Section 133 is an extraordinary grant of authority to state and local governments, because it allows them to tailor their officers’ authority to local immigration enforcement needs. A state or local government can agree with the AG to authorize its law enforcement officers to enforce the INA’s civil and/or criminal provisions without dedicating those officers to full-time immigration enforcement. Section 133 clearly contemplates that multiple officers could be authorized to perform one or more immigration enforcement functions.

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16677&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1007

[fast4522]

The United States Congress may pass bills and laws that the body of the Congress may not read but, this law was crafted with no loop holes left for any administration to go after it (particularly this one) in court. Given today's events in New York involving a naturalized citizen this administration will be walking tippy toes on thin ice with letting local law enforcement perform their jobs. People who intend to harm us will adapt and hide in all areas we are weak including but not limited to undocumented aliens living in this country. Any blunder by this administration for failure to act resulting in death on any scale will have huge ramifications against anyone currently in federal elected office. Most of the time the decisions will be to do nothing at all because of political advantage. This is exactly how fast I can come to this conclusion as asked.

[ArlJim78]

Well this is surely a misguided policy (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/05/obama-new-jersey-gulf-oil-spill.html). It seems that when Obama travels, before people are allowed to talk to the president their immigration status is checked:eek:

But isn't that misguided racial stereotyping?
__________________________________________________ __________
Last Friday the White House issued this statement: "On Wednesday, May 5, 2010 President Obama will travel to Central New Jersey and discuss the economy. More details regarding the visit, including press credentialing information, will be released in the coming days."

Such PR forays are usually envisioned one to two weeks out, each designed with a simple message to be delivered. Each trip though requires complex advance work both by political and security teams. The political people will scout the factory tour route usually with instructions to avoid places requiring the president to wear a hardhat, which along with those goofy bike helmets, he does not like.

The team will identify a few employees to talk with the president, check their backgrounds for immigration status and child support delinquencies, brief the company execs on protocol, arrange for top-notch sound equipment and lighting, risers for the TV cameras to see over any crowd and importantly arrange the proper backdrop for the president's remarks. They even carry cans of women's hair spray, which dull the glaring sheen on those large banners often hanging over the stage.

[delayjf]

Bigmack,

The anti immigration organizers should make that fellow in the picture the official posterboy of their movement.

[fast4522]

You mean like this one?