Sessions Called Incendiary On Immigration, Linked To White Nationalist: Report

Since becoming the top ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Jeff Sessions' record has been almost solely analyzed for tealeaves on how he will approach Barack Obama's forthcoming Supreme Court nomination.

The Judiciary Committee, however, has a far broader purview than simply the consideration of judiciary picks, all of which Sessions will hold heavy influence over. On Thursday, the Alabama Republican's resume in regards to one of those other fields -- immigration reform -- was placed under the microscope by the immigration reform group America's Voice.

In a document provided to the Huffington Post, America's Voice doesn't hold back its punches, calling Sessions "one of the leading (and loudest) voices against comprehensive immigration reform in the United States Senate." They also tie the Senator to John Tanton, an anti-immigration activist described as a white nationalist by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

There is no evidence that Sessions holds some of the most extreme views of the individuals and groups he has associated with, and they have no large-scale financial links to the senator. But the report by America's Voice illuminates just where Sessions stands and who he associates with on one of the big political issues to confront Congress in the years ahead. And they build upon earlier reporting linking the senator to racially inflammatory views.

The America's Voice report documents how Sessions has regularly appeared with or joined political causes backed by groups founded by Tanton, including the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), NumbersUSA -- which named Sessions its "2008 Defender of the Rule of Law" -- and the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR.) The senator also received a $1,000 donation from the U.S Immigration Reform, a political action committee founded by Tanton's wife.

Sessions' office did not immediately return a request for comment.

According to a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center, these groups have served as vehicles for getting quasi-Nativist rhetoric inserted into the mainstream immigration debate. They are, indeed, an oft-quoted source for reporters writing about the topic. Tanton, meanwhile, was described by SPLC as the founder of "the racist Social Contract Press," and a correspondent "with Holocaust deniers, white nationalist intellectuals and Klan lawyers for decades." Interestingly enough, his work on conservation causes earlier in life was lauded by environmentalists.

For Sessions' critics, the ties to Tanton and his groups gain even more import now that the senator will be playing such an integral role in the immigration debate. But they are also a reflection of a political career that has been defined by anti-immigration rhetoric and legislation. Sessions has supported the construction of a fence along the Mexican border and opposed the establishment of a guest worker program. One of the fiercest opponents of the massive immigration reform effort that died in the Senate two years ago, he once dubbed the effort the "Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act of 2007."

Comments

[mbrlr]

Wny do so many on the right tend to capitalize with such wild abandon? I don't remember being taught that capitalization was a virtue.

We are and always have been a nation of immigrants, both legal and illegal. The attitudes of many towards Latinos today mimic the feelings and the arguments used against the Irish in the 1840s, the Italians in the 1890s, the Germans around the time of WWI, the Japanese in WWII, and the Chinese for over a century. Just as with those arguments, the argument against Latinos is flawed and a product more of bigotry than reason.

[GJEIII]

One last comment for you disparraging southern politicians like Senator Sessions, most of the chatter posted above is simply untrue. Recall that most people in the US remember former George Wallace as a racist Alabama Govonor due to politically expedient (and dispecable) behavior denying black students access to The University of Alabama. What most DO NOT remember is that years later, GEORGE WON HIS COMEBACK GUBERNATORIAL RACE BY WINNING THE BLACK VOTE.

Things have changed for the better in the south much faster than in many other parts of the country.

[GJEIII]

Senator Sessions' so-called anti-immigration activity only includes the enforcement of federal and local laws on the books today. The Senator represents his consitutents, something unique, as many elected to congress do not. As a matter of fact, you may not have noticed that the Senator also represents 70% of Americans when polled on the topic of illegal immigration. If you don't like the laws, go ahead and change them. That would be good for 2010 conservative candidates.

I would add that the the elimination of fundings for for raids on illegal employers AND illegal immigrants by the Obama administration amounts to a policy of lawlessness and selective enforcement.

You are certainly correct that if given a total touchy-feely-constitution-lite-nominee, Sesssions could be the giant slayer. I add that I hope that it does NOT come to that, because as President Bush asked the judicial committee Dem holdouts month after month and year after year, "just allow my nominees an up or down vote". Most DO deserve that much.

Thank goodness Senator Spector took the President and Vice President's offer to "CONVERT". That suckup would have given at quick judiciary YES vote if it got him on the news and pocket full on bacon.

[DelawareBob]

Sen. Sessions sees the damage these ILLEGAL ALIENS are doing to this Country how they are breaking the law by being here. This illegal immigration has got to come to an end.

I can't say the ILLEGAL ALIENS are completely to blame for the shape of our economy, but they are a BIG part of the problem. The ILLEGAL ALIENS send BILLIONS upon BILLIONS out of this Country every year, money we will NEVER see again. Does this help our economy?

How about the BILLIONS the American taxpayers fork out for the ILLEGAL ALIEN BABIES, the schooling of them, the medical care and the list goes on, and on, and on.

How about the MILLIONS upon MILLIONS paid to jail ILLEGAL ALIENS for the crimes, then the cost to deport them. Does this help our economy?

Then you have these activist groups, the Catholic Church and the ACLU that want AMNESTY for these ILLEGAL ALIENS. It would be absolute suicide for this Country if AMNESTY were granted to the 20 million or so ILLEGAL ALIENS. We have more and more people out of work everyday and they want to add another 20 million to this Country? I say, "NO"!

[AllenConnors]

"supported the construction of a fence along the Mexican border"

You mean he voted in favor of the border fence bill that passed the Senate 80-19?

"opposed the establishment of a guest worker program... One of the fiercest opponents of the massive immigration reform effort that died in the Senate two years ago"

You mean he voted against a bill that failed in the Senate 34-61 and 46-53?

What horrors! Looks to me like Sessions is in the mainstream, and America's Voice isn't.

[Crazyquilt]

isn't "white nationalist intellectuals" an oxymoron?

[sfirx]

President Reagan was accused of being a racist and he gave amnesty to millions of illegals.

[sfirx]

I don't it's fair to accuse someone of being racist simply because they want to control immigration. Japan does it and I don't think they are a racist country.

[avocats]

"radical anti-immigration movement?" does this include all people who are against illegal immigration? because it seems pretty straightforward to be upset if people are breaking our laws (sneaking into the country, working without visa, identity theft, tax avoidance) How is this radical? Congress made the laws in 1986, when it granted amnesty to millions of illegals. Are we just naive to think that they might actually be enforced or honored? And it's NOT anti-immigration; it's anti-ILLEGAL-immigration.

[avocats]

What you are repeatedly describing as "comprehensive immigration reform" is no such thing: it is a broad amnesty that will "legalize" at least 15 million people, not including their relatives who can follow thereafter, and most of which are unskilled and uneducated. It is exactly what we did in 1986 (the so-called "Final Amnesty") and it failed miserably to end illegal immigration, because no one in government bothered to enforce the laws between 1986 and the twilight days of the Bush administration. The fact that the overwhelming majority of the illegal population is Mexican/Central American does not mean that people who oppose amnesty and illegal immigration are "racist." (In fact, race isn't even involved, given that "latino," "hispanic," and "Central American" are not racial categories.) I oppose illegal immigration by people of all races. But will that stop the race-card playing? Nope.

[avocats]

Amazing that you are bent out of shape by the hatchet-job done on Sondra Sotomayor one day, then turn around and carry water for the immigration "reform" activists, repeating their smear tactics. I'm no fan of Sessions, but seriously, is there a FACT anywhere in that story? Or just guilt by very attenuated association? I've watched FAIR and CIS for many years, and see nothing there that's radical, reactionary, or racist. I've heard all the Tanton stories and I've also read that the SPLC makes a good living out of identifying "racists" and selling programs to combat racism. (See the Harper's story on its founder.)
The problem is that one cannot oppose illegal immigration or suggest limits on legal immigration without being called racist. I oppose illegal immigration and some of the visa-employment programs and it has nothing to do with racism. I believe that all immigrants should obey our laws, starting with the immigration laws; that immigrants should wait their turn, not jump the line at will; and that some type of restrictions on immigration are universally applied and make sense (fair allocation among countries with potential immigrants; requirements that potential immigrants have a means of, or potential for, supporting themselves or a sponsor who will; limited employment visas if there is substantial unemployment in the sector in question).

[Mintcondition]

He is the banjo boy, look at him:)

[mdbmama]

Let me tell you about Jeff Sessions. I live in Alabama - much to my dismay I have a wealth of information about this so-called man. I have a LETTER from him telling me that my opinions do not matter to him. Hmmmmmmmmm - I guess as a Democrat I am not really a constituent. I have been hung up on by his office when calling to discuss a vote he made. I was being polite, I assure you. I just could argue my point with facts and figures - they couldn't. He does not believe health care is a right for all. His health care advisor told me that he pays for his health care so everyone should. As I explained to him - he doesn't really pay for his health care --- we do. As do the residents of the state of Alabama pay for mine. And I thank them. But not everyone is as lucky as we are. My mother died at work at the age of 75 years, 6 months and 3 days with Medicare A because that was all she had when my father married his mistress and all my mother got was $350 a month alimony after 3 children and 28 years of marriage (20 years in the military). AND she was a notch baby. Dead silence on Sessions end. He (and his staff) is an uncaring, egotistical, just say hell-no unempathetic, unsympathetic, evil, hatefilled man. Good luck to us with him in a

[Liberal2]

As much as I hold Sessions in contempt for his political philosophy in general, in this matter are you just calling for for legalizing illegal aliens. It's been my understanding that the US already has an extremely liberal policy on people applying for moving here and becoming citizens.

When did we stop allowing legal immigration?

Or are you misrepresenting the issue?

[Mum]

I don't think that you read the same Sam Stein article that I did. What in the article suggests that Stein is "just calling for legalizing illegal aliens"? And what issue do you think he is misrepresenting? Stein is writing about Sessions and his connections to Tanton and Tanton's groups, which groups purport to be in support of immigration reform, and are actually against any and all comprehensive immigration reform that does not work against immigrants.

The US policy for immigration and citizenship is NOT extremely liberal, and we have not stopped legal immigration, but neither of those two points are at issue in this piece by Stein. So, now whose misrepresenting the issue?

[avocats]

Of course they are misrepresenting the issue. We have liberal imigration laws. There has always been a "path to citizenship." The same arguments were used in 1986 for the "final amnesty." It was granted; it was riddled with fraud; and it greatly encouraged illegal immigration because people (rightly) assumed that this is NOT a nation of laws, but rather a circus of special interest groups.

[maryyooch]

This is some scary stuff. Hopefully, with this bit of info, the Dem's will be able to hold his feet to the ground. If more damaging info comes out, can they get him off of the committee?