|
|
 |
NAPOLITANO AND GODDARD FINALLY REALIZE THEY WORK FOR CITIZENS OF ARIZONA
|
|
|
|
It’s about time! Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, no doubt concerned about his job, has felt the pressure of the people and has concluded that Proposition 200 is consistent with federal law. Goddard and Governor Napolitano know the people’s initiative is Constitutionally sound and have decided a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the illegal-immigration measure has no merit. What does have merit is the fact that it is Goddard’s job to uphold the rule of law; former Attorney General Napolitano should know that is true, but then how many employers has she ever held accountable for hiring illegal aliens?
Goddard filed his opinion Monday with U.S. District Court Judge David C. Bury, the misguided judge who blocked implementation of the measure until Dec. 22, (voters approved of it in the November 2 election) when he will hear evidence for and against it. Judge Bury needs to review whether it is illegal to give away tax-funded freebies to people who are in this country illegally. We suggest Bury enroll in common sense 101 classes at a local community college.
Goddard, who earlier concluded Proposition 200 applies only to welfare benefits, said the federal government bans illegal aliens from receiving certain benefits. In fact the federal government bans illegals from entering the country, from being employed and from obtaining false documentation of their status, all laws which are being virtually ignored by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and are ignored by the President of the United States. Goddard actually saw the light--or felt the heat of voters--and had the courage actually to work for U.S. citizens. He said that state and local governments are required to cooperate with federal immigration authorities. And this guy ever doubted that it was his duty to uphold all laws of the land-- not just a select few?
The Arizona Red Star included this quote from the brown-supremacist group MALDEF who demand that a group of criminals be granted special protection because of the color of their skin. “We disagree with Goddard’s opinion,” said Daniel Ortega, one of the lawyers who filed the federal lawsuit by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “We believe the initiative violates federal law because it turns state government workers into immigration agents.” Ortega obviously does not understand which country he resides in; we are all reporters of illegal activity especially since the attacks of September 11, 2001.
A point of clarification is needed to determine the contentious question whether state and local government workers should check the immigration papers of everyone seeking non-federally mandated public benefits, a term Proposition 200 did not define. We feel that anyone who is in charge of taxpayer-funded programs should insure they are going to legal citizens first. What do they want to do--give food stamps and college tuition to Osama Bin Laden or members of gangs who have entered our country illegally?
With Judge Bury’s approval, (what business do judges have giving orders anyway) Napolitano signed parts of the initiative into law last week. We guess she has taken much heat from her constituents over her reluctance to uphold the will of the voters, no doubt having visions of Grey Davis in her head.
Napolitano seems more concerned with being accepted by the federal government instead of protecting the citizens of her state. She says the state must ask permission of the U.S. Justice Department to approve the voting provisions included in the proposition. The provisions require Arizonans to prove their citizenship when registering to vote: there are already federal laws prohibiting illegals from voting, but no one enforces them. The measure also requires voters casting a ballot in person will be required to show ID, but of course that provision is even suspect because of ID fraud and the possibility of giving illegals drivers licenses. The federal government must approve any voting changes, but again these are not really changes because federal law already mandates the provisions.
Randy Pullen, chairman of Yes on Proposition 200, said Monday that he agrees with Goddard’s opinion concerning the measure’s constitutionality. But he differs with Goddard’s previous interpretation that the measure applies only to welfare benefits.
Pullen wants even more done to stop illegal aliens from feeding off taxpayer- funded assistance programs. He has filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court asking a judge to broaden the scope of benefits that should be denied to illegal aliens who have no respect for our rule of law. Pullen wants to include everything from unemployment benefits to college education: these should be denied to anyone who makes a mockery of our citizenship by entering the country illegally. Now we need a proposition to go after employers who hire illegals especially if the federal government is unwilling to uphold the law. We need a governor who will work for the people who elected her, a majority of whom, we hope, were U.S. citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BORDER ISSUES FAIR AT SAHUARITA CHURCH
|
|
|
|
The Friends of BorderLinks will present a Border Issues Fair on Friday, January 14, 2005, from 2:00-6:00 p.m. at Good Shepherd United Church of Christ, 17750 South La Canada in Sahuarita.
Seven organizations working to give humanitarian suport and education will be presenting information:
Border Action Network
BorderLinks
Humane Borders
Derechos Humanos
Just Coffee
No More Deaths (No mas muerte)
Samaritans
The Border Issues Fair presents an opportunity to learn more about the reasons why Central and South Americans are risking their lives to come across our border, as well as to learn more about the groups who are offering humanitarian support to immigrants and learn about ways you can help. The program will include: Displays from different countries.
Presentations by each group.
A key-note address by Rick Ufford-Chase, Director, BorderLinks. A Sonoran Supper prepared by the volunteers of Casa Misericordia in Nogales. The cost for the supper is $5. Families and Youth are welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
74 AMERICAN KIDS FOUND IN MEXICO SCHOOLS, DEPORTED
|
|
|
|
By MARK STEVENSON
Associated Press Writer
December 10, 2004
MEXICO CITY — Mexican authorities took custody of 74 American youths who were attending two irregularly operated boarding schools and returned them to the United States on Thursday. The youths, who were found to be in Mexico without proper travel or residency documents, were handed over to U.S. consular officials and then taken to Los Angeles, the Interior Department, which oversees migratory issues, said in a press statement.
The statement bore the title: “The immigration institute rescues 74 U.S. youths with supposed behavioral problems.” U.S. consular authorities were not immediately available for comment on the whereabouts of the students.
The Interior Department said the schools — which it identified as the “The Mission” school in Ensenada, Baja California, and the “Abundant Life Academy” in the town of Chapala in Jalisco state — were raided because they “did not comply with sanitary regulations.” “It is important to stress that none of the raids involved violence, and the human rights and personal safety of the youths were fully respected,” the Interior Department press statement said.
Immigration agents found 57 students at the Ensenada facility and 17 in Chapala. Mexican authorities identified the schools as facilities for children “with behavior problems.” An Abundant Life Web site described the Abundant Life Academy at Lake Chapala as “the answer for the gifted yet immature American troubled teen that is unmotivated and rebellious toward parental authority.”
The slogan of the facility is “Jesus is the only answer,” and says the academy “is essentially a school for students who need to get back on track, to mature emotionally and spiritually, and learn that they are not the center of the universe.” Chapala is a lakeside community about 230 miles west of Mexico City popular among U.S. expatriates and retirees. Some schools in Ensenada, meanwhile, have had a history of problems.
In September, a lack of qualified doctors and reports that some teens were being abused prompted Mexican authorities to shut down three centers for
troubled youths in Baja California. Mexican officials sent home 564 U.S. teenagers found at the Casa by the Sea and Casa de la Esperanza schools in Ensenada, on the Pacific coast about 60 miles south of San Diego, California, after authorities found no qualified medical personnel worked at the schools and no records were being kept on the teenagers.
At the same time, about 26 teenagers from the Genesis center in Rosarito, about 15 miles south of the U.S. border — were also sent home after Mexican immigration and health authorities carried out a surprise inspection. All 590 teenagers did not have proper paperwork to be in Mexico.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CUSTOMS AGENT INDICTED FOR SMUGGLING DRUGS, ILLEGALS INTO COUNTRY
|
|
|
|
As many as three million illegal aliens are estimated to have entered this country between Oct.1, 2003, and Oct. 1, 2004. It turns out now that some of those illegal aliens crossed our borders with the help of U.S. Customs.
Casey Wian has the report from Los Angeles — Casey. CASEY WIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Lou, it’s a stunning development out of southern Texas, a Customs and Border Protection officer has been arrested and charged with helping smuggle at least 500 illegal aliens into this country.
According to the U.S. Attorney’s indictment, 41-year-old Fabian Solis received $300 for each illegal alien he allowed to pass through lanes he worked at three Texas border crossings — Roma, Rio Grand City and Falcon Heights.
Since March 2003, prosecutors allege Officer Solis made at least $170,000 from the scheme. He now faces up to 45 years in prison and a million dollars in fines. Prosecutors declined to comment on a judge’s decision to release him after posting bail of just $15,000.
A Customs and Border Protection spokesman called the alleged smuggling conspiracy an awful thing if it’s true, a black mark on us all — Lou.
DOBBS: Casey, what is the consideration? How widespread is this?
WIAN: Well, there’s really no way to tell, but just less than a month ago, another Customs and Border Protection official in the Texas area, this one a senior inspector, was indicted as part of a plot to smuggle more than 10,000 pounds of marijuana into this country from Mexico. Customs and Border Protection officials say those are isolated incidents — Lou.
DOBBS: Casey, thank you very much.
Casey Wian reporting from Los Angeles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUSH’S PICK FOR SECRETARY OF HOMELAND DEFENSE WITHDRAWS AFTER A ‘WHOOPS’ ON HIRING AN ILLEGAL
|
|
|
|
By Adam Entous
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush’s pick to become homeland security
secretary, former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, abruptly withdrew his nomination on Friday due to what he said were questions over the immigration status of a housekeeper and nanny he employed. Kerik’s surprise
decision sent the White House scrambling for a new candidate to oversee the nation’s sprawling Department of Homeland Security, charged with helping prevent a repeat of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Bush’s current homeland security adviser, Frances Townsend, is one possible candidate. Others include Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Kerik, 49, nominated by Bush little more than a week ago, said in his withdrawal letter to the President that he discovered the problems about his housekeeper and nanny while completing documents required for Senate confirmation to the post, whose duties include enforcement of immigration laws.
Kerik’s is the latest high-level nomination since the 1990s derailed by tax and immigration issues related to domestic help. “I uncovered information that now leads me to question the immigration status of a person who had been in my employ as a housekeeper and nanny. It has also been brought to my attention that for a period of time during such employment, required tax payments and related filings had not been made,” he said.
Kerik said he feared that the disclosure would “only serve as a significant and unnecessary distraction to the vital efforts of the Department of Homeland Security.” “For these reasons, I must ask you to withdraw my nomination. I
personally apologize to you for not having focused on this earlier,” Kerik wrote.
The announcement also came after news organizations raised questions about some
of Kerik’s business dealings, including his profitable membership on the board of Taser International, the stun-gun maker which is seeking to sell more of its devices to the federal government. The White House had earlier on Friday
expressed confidence Kerik could ensure there would be no conflicts. In addition to the questions about Taser, The New York Times said that in 2002, Kerik paid a fine for using a police sergeant and two detectives to research his autobiography.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WHY NO INDICTMENT FOR BENARD KERIK?
|
|
|
|
by Jacob G. Hornberger
Amidst all the hubbub over Bernard Kerik’s decision to remove himself from consideration as director of Homeland Security owing to his reported hiring of an illegal-immigrant nanny, no one, including the press, seems to be asking an important question: Why aren’t the feds seeking a criminal indictment against him? After all, hasn’t it been a federal felony offense since 1986 for any American to hire an illegal immigrant? Didn’t the feds charge Tyson Foods officials with hiring illegal immigrants just last year?
Haven’t they also targeted Wal-Mart executives for possible indictment for the same thing?
So, why no federal criminal indictment for President Bush’s cabinet nominee Bernard Kerik for hiring an illegal immigrant?
One of the legal principles of a free society is that of “equal
application” of the law. What that principle means is that if the representative body of the people (e.g., the Congress) makes a certain activity a criminal offense, then the law should be enforced on everyone across the board, regardless of whether the offender is rich or poor, politically powerful or politically weak, and regardless of the consequences.
A related political principle is known as the “rule of law” What that principle means is that a free society entails everyone’s having to answer only to a law that has been duly enacted and is clearly on the books, as compared with a society based on the “rule of men,” where people are expected to respond to the arbitrary and capricious dictates of government officials.
For almost 20 years, the law against hiring illegal immigrants has been enforced arbitrarily and selectively. While the feds periodically go after this business or that, such as Tyson Foods or Wal-Mart, they have permitted others, such as rich and famous cabinet nominees, to get a pass from prosecution. Federal criminal prosecution for hiring illegal immigrants turns on who you are rather than on what you’ve done.
A criminal-justice process in which federal officials are selectively and systematically determining who is to be prosecuted for a certain crime
And who isn’t violates the equal-application principle and also converts an ostensible “rule of law” system to an actual “rule of men” system.
Perhaps worst of all, as is the case with economic crimes in such countries as China and Russia, the arbitrary and discretionary manner in which this regulatory law is enforced provides the perfect vehicle for ensuring that the business community does not get too far out of line, that is, by openly dissenting against government policies. After all, what business that might be hiring illegal immigrants, either knowingly or unknowingly, wants to make waves that could result in a felony prosecution, large fines, and exorbitant attorney’s fees?
With the federal sword of Damocles hanging over its head for illegally hiring the foreigners, the American business community is as likely to go along to get along with the feds as its counterparts in China and Russia with their governments.
Has the law against hiring illegal immigrants stemmed the tide of Illegal immigration, which was its supposed purpose in the first place? It’s
hard to see that it has, given the millions of illegal immigrants still residing in the United States - and presumably working for American businesses.
Moreover, by criminalizing what is in essence a private transaction between two adult parties, the law violates the fundamental principles of freedom of association and freedom of contract.
When laws are not enforced equally on everyone, people tend to lose respect for the law in general. Given that the feds give a pass to the rich and powerful who are accused of violating the law, such as federal cabinet nominee Bernard Kerik, the only proper course is for Congress to repeal the law and pardon those select few who have been charged and convicted of it.
Moreover, since the law isn’t accomplishing its end anyway, what’s the point of retaining it on the books?
Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and president of
The Future of Freedom Foundation (www.fff.org)
in Fairfax, Va.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY - REPORT EMPLOYERS WHO HIRE ILLEGAL ALIENS
|
|
|
|
Attention! On a national radio show a U.S. Congressman gave a phone number 1-888-464-4218 that employers can use to quickly check whether a Social Security number belongs to the illegal using it; however, the voice says “what’s your EIN? You have to get an EIN to use this “voluntary pilot program”.
So then get an Employers ID Number [EIN] from the IRS; get a Form SS-4 at the local IRS office; they have a booklet “understanding Your EIN” with a phone number that’s been changed to 1-800-829-4933.
Fill out the SS-4, make up a company name, anything will do, check question 8a as “Sole Proprietor” and call 1-800-829-4933 and read her the answers you put on the Form SS-4. The federal employee will give you an EIN over the phone in a couple of minutes. I did this yesterday, and will call the 1-888-464 4218 tomorrow morn and give the Social Security number I found on an illegal restaurant worker’s discarded pay stub. Then I will inform the employer he is in violation of Title 8 , section 1324a, felony for “any person, knowingly or unknowingly hiring/harboring/transporting illegals.” Snatch 1 illegal/workplace and hundreds flee, and suddenly ther are job openings for students, laid-off techies, assorted loafers.
|
|
