iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Clarence B. Jones

Clarence B. Jones

Posted: May 4, 2010 09:12 AM

Charges of Racism for Criticism of Illegal Immigration Is No Substitute for Effective Border Enforcement

What's Your Reaction:

I was surprised by some of the reactions to my original blog piece, last week on Arizona's efforts to curb illegal immigration. Some even indicated they were surprised that the Huffington Post printed my article. Wow! Have we become that polarized?

From a constitutional law standpoint, let's try to tone down the rhetoric a bit. I concede that the Legislature and Governor of Arizona, in their desperation to stem illegal immigration from Mexico, may have overstepped the boundary of their authority under our constitution.

I have not forgotten Article 6, the "Supremacy Clause" of our Constitution. It states that:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. "

The 1956 U.S. Supreme Court case, Pennsylvania vs. Nelson, suggest that the Arizona legislation, making it a crime to be in the state without having obtained lawful entry into the U.S and authorizing State police to demand proof of citizenship for persons they had "reasonable suspicion" to believe were illegal aliens, may be"pre-empted" by existing federal law. "Preemption" can be either express or implied. Consequently, this means that any federal law, even a regulation or federal agency dealing with illegal immigration is supreme and preempts any conflicting State law.

This could be the basis of a successful legal challenge to the recently enacted Arizona law.

However, my original article was not about constitutional legality, but about sensible and rational public policy. From the various placards, signs and speeches protesting the Arizona legislation illegal immigration appears to be implicitly elevated as a worthwhile pursuit that all Arizonans and American citizens at large should compassionately understand and support. This is where I part company with so many of my friends on the "liberal left".

Current federal law mandates legal immigrants to carry proof of their residency status in the United States at all times. The issue of "racial profiling" would not arise as a matter of concern if persons who are likely to be the subject of such profiling had been not been able to enter the country illegally in the first place. Arizona, desperate to find a way to discover, identify and deport such persons has enacted a law that runs the risk of "racial profiling" the group of persons they seek to detect as suspect illegal immigrants.

That someone may have entered Arizona illegally "to get a job to feed their family", "to obtain medical care for their wife or child", or simply "in pursuit of a better life and educational opportunities for his family", are all worthwhile objectives. Many American citizens can compassionately understand such motivations. However humanistic their reasons may be to illegally enter into the United States, they do nothing to extinguish such illegality.

In various communities throughout our own country there have been heart wrenching instances where a father, out of desperation, has unsuccessfully attempted to rob a bank or a consumer products place of business because he had no money to feed his hungry children, pay his rent or pay his home mortgage. His act, while compassionately understandable, nevertheless is illegal. His conduct broke the law and put other innocent persons at risk. So it is with illegal immigration from Mexico "in search of a better life", "to earn money to send back to one's family," "to obtain medical care for a child or wife," and so on. They too are all are worthwhile objectives. But, entry into the United States in pursuit of such objectives is not merely "undocumented conduct;" it is an illegal breach of the United States border.

A naturalized citizen wrote a letter to the New York Times, published on Saturday May 1, 2010. The writer said,

As a naturalized citizen who waited five years to obtain a green card and then another four years to become a citizen (with all the expense and paperwork involved), I see no reason to condone illegal immigration.


If we, as American citizens, illegally entered Australia, Canada, Britain or any other country, we could hardly object to being asked for our papers, nor be surprised to be deported forthwith if we didn't have them. Has everyone lost sight of the meaning of the word "illegal"?

A repetitive theme of the placards carried by demonstrators this past weekend protesting Arizona's new law is "Legalization Now for All Illegal Immigrants". i.e., urging de facto amnesty for everyone in the country illegally.

I restate my original position: All of the protest is misdirected and at the wrong parties. Massive demonstrations should take place in front of the White House, Congress the Pentagon and the Embassy of Mexico in Washington demanding once and for all that our border with Mexico be closed, now; in lieu of immediate legalization of illegal immigrants. As Ross Douthat, columnist for the New York Times, wrote, "If you don't like what Arizona just did, the answer isn't to scream "fascist!" It's to demand that the federal government do its job, so that we can have the immigration system that both Americans and immigrants deserve."

And, now comes the irony or all ironies: The Government of Mexico has now issued an "advisory warning" to its citizens about the "risks" and potential "dangers" of traveling to Arizona. Hello! Did they ever issue such an "advisory warning" before the recent Arizona legislation about entering into Arizona or other parts of the United States as an illegal immigrant?

As an African-American I have experienced and witnessed racial discrimination and racial profiling. Now, however I perceive the establishment of a new race relations paradigm: a flawed immigration public policy becomes immune from criticism when such criticism challenges the effort to legitimize illegal immigration from Mexico. (9.5% current national unemployment and 18% or higher unemployment in many African-American and Hispanic communities.) Just where are additional jobs supposed to come from to enable our new illegal "legalized" immigrants to become self-sustaining tax paying members in our respective communities?

That most illegal immigrants or "undocumented" persons in Arizona are persons with various shades of brown skin, does not make challenges to their illegal immigration "racist". Often such charges of racism are invoked as a substitute for dispassionate analysis of the serious issue being confronted. Charges of racism directed toward those who want an end to illegal immigration is no substitute for immediate effective closing of our border with Mexico. Having said this, however, I do not challenge or dismiss the observation of Frank Rich in his recent Op Ed piece in this past Sunday's New York Times.

To be angry about illegal immigration is hardly tantamount to being a bigot. But the Arizona law expressing that anger is bigoted, and in a very particular way. The law dovetails seamlessly with the national "Take Back America" crusade that has attended the rise of Barack Obama and the accelerating demographic shift our first African-American president represents.


The crowd that wants Latinos to show their papers if there's a "reasonable suspicion" of illegality is often the same crowd still demanding that the president produce a document proving his own citizenship.

To the "Take Back America" right, the illegitimate Obama is Illegal Alien No.1".

Is this what a national discussion of our illegal immigration public policy is supposed to read and sound like in our newly acclaimed "post-racial America"? Is this indicative of what we have become, in this second decade of the 21st century, following our election of the first African-American as the 44th President of the United States? If so, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, I fear for my country when I reflect that God is Just.

 
 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,103
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
04:37 PM on 06/01/2010
In my state it not uncommon for the police (state and local) to periodically set up roadblocks and stop all vehicles. They may be checking for vehicle violations, insurance and registration compliance, or intoxication. By stopping ALL persons, they avoid profiling. The objective is to insure that the citizenry is safe. If lawbreakers are found, they are detained. To those who would protect the illegal immigrant--aiding and abetting a criminal in breaking the law is a criminal act in itself. This country, your chosen country, survives under the rule of law. If you encourage others to break the law, you do not help them as much as you hurt yourself and your fellow citizens.
11:58 AM on 06/01/2010
This is what illegal immigration actually does to the US.

This Lecture was in 1999. - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FM1YU-Ni_84

Looking at the chart when he gets there,
What they estimated in 1999 for 2010 is spot on what actually happened.
[Just over 300 million in the US.]

When he gets to the gumball demonstration bear in mind the large jar doesn't represent Mexicans.
It represents the people in the world that are WORSE OFF than Mexicans.

Because of illegal immigration from 1999 to present we've had to:
Build TWICE as many schools.
Build TWICE as many roads.
Build TWICE as many sewer plants.
Build TWICE as much about anything else.
Have to have twice as many cops and firemen and teachers. [Or leave areas under serviced.]
And use TWICE as many trees.

Anyone that thinks that isn't a significant load on our economy is a moron.

If you don't want every city in the US to become a giant LA Slum within ~40 years, then illegal immigration has to STOP NOW!

~

Link to just the chart. [Sorry about the quality.]
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/imagecache/fpage/files/cck_images/population.jpg...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mlondeaux
A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.
05:34 PM on 05/15/2010
Anyone who is against our immigration laws, specifically the one recently passed in Arizona, should check out the immigration law in Mexico. It's unbelievable how they treat their illegal immigrants from south of THEIR border!! http://www.alipac.us/article5198.html

Every country in the world has harsher immigration laws than we do.Yet President Felipe Calderon whines like a little baby and calls us racist if we even try to protect our borders. I lived in L.A. for 30 years, the mecca for illegal aliens. I no longer live there specifically because the illegal alien situation got way out of control. And now that Mayor V has declared a boycott against Arizona every last one of them will be headed to L.A. and the situation will only get worse. If you haven't personally experienced the migration of illegals into your neighborhood then you really have no idea just how bad the problem is. Try living in L.A. for a year and see if your attitude changes. I was a Democrat when I first moved there. By the time I left I had become a Republican.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lukester
01:19 PM on 05/13/2010
"First they came for the Communists;
I did not speak because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews ;
I did not speak because I was not a Jew.
Then they came to fetch the workers, members of trade unions;
I did not speak because I was not a trade unionist.
Afterwards, they came for the Catholics;
I did not say anything because I was a Protestant.
Eventually they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak ..."

Martin Niemöller,Pastor
Dachau, 1942.
photo
voyager48
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
04:09 PM on 05/13/2010
Fiorstly - the funny thing is that only 1 in 6 hispanics is in AZ illegally so there will be plenty of Hispanics left to speak for their community.

Secondly Illegal aliens enjoy the protection of the constitutuion, which is quite probably more protection than they get from their own country so i dont see how this applies. However being that they are trespassing and committing identity theft to be here and try to work does not put them above the law.

Thirdly the fact that they are here illegally means that they in fact do not respect the law of teh couhntry and why shold we not ship the whole lot out and then allow people back on a fair allocation basis including the tens of millions of Africans, Chinese, Indians, Eastern Europeans. Now that would not be racist!

The hispanics are spreading hysteria because they know they are getting preferantial treatment and they are arrogant enough to believe that it is their right!
11:43 PM on 05/12/2010
USE THIS: To those who support illegal immigration, please tell my why it is that you insist illegal immigrants be the exception to the rule - that they are entitled to break our country's laws? This growing sense of entitlement & the increasing sense of impunity by illegal immigrants is quite disturbing. What are you so against with regard to SB1070? That law enforcement actually be allowed to perform their duties which include trying to protect the citizen's of Arizona against the rising tide of violence and desecration? Violence stemming directly from the influx of illegal immigrants? Desecration as illegal immigrants flood our cities and towns, subsequently filling the streets with the homeless, the unemployed, the destitute?

For those who support illegal immigrants, it isn't enough I guess, that Arizona's citizens are violated daily. It isn't enough that law enforcement is barely permitted to exercise any measure of authority (as you hide - once again - behind unjust screams of racism.) You won't be content until you've rendered all manner of law enforcement powerless & stripped every citizen of protection - leaving them helpless targets to your precious illegal immigrants. What the hell is wrong with you? They've done nothing but make demands while violating our laws and our citizens. But you support illegal immigrants - no matter what the cost to our citizens. How many citizens have to become victims before you get behind THEM in lieu of this storm of violence and devastation created by illegal immigrants.
11:40 PM on 05/12/2010
To Moderators: please post this as words were cut off 1st submission.

To those who support illegal immigration, please explain why it is that you insist illegal immigrants be the exception to the rule - that they are entitled to break our country's laws? The growing sense of entitlement & the increasing sense of impunity by illegal immigrants is more than disturbing. What are you so against with regard to SB1070? That law enforcement actually be allowed to perform their duties which include trying to protect the citizen's of Arizona against the rising tide of violence & desecration? Violence stemming directly from the influx of illegal immigrants? Desecration as illegal immigrants flood our cities and towns, subsequently filling the streets with the homeless, the unemployed, the destitute?

Those supporting illegals, apparently it isn't enough for you that Arizona's citizens are violated daily. It's not enough that law enforcement is barely permitted to exercise any measure of authority (as you hide - once again - behind unjust screams of racism.) You won't be content until you've rendered all manner of law enforcement powerless & stripped every citizen of protection - leaving them helpless targets to illegal immigrants. What the hell is wrong with you? They've done nothing but make demands while violating our laws and our citizens. But you support illegal immigrants - no matter what the cost to our citizens. Tell me, how many citizens must be victimized before you get behind THEM in lieu of this storm of violence
11:27 PM on 05/12/2010
To those who support illegal immigration, please help me understand why it is that you insist illegal immigrants be the exception to the rule - that they are entitled to break our country's laws? This growing sense of entitlement and the ever increasing sense of impunity by illegal immigrants is more than disturbing.
What are you so against with regard to SB1070? That law enforcement actually be allowed to perform their duties which include trying to protect the citizen's of Arizona against the rising tide of violence and desecration? Violence stemming directly from the influx of illegal immigrants? Desecration as illegal immigrants flood our cities and towns, subsequently filling the streets with the homeless, the unemployed, the destitute?
For those who support illegal immigrants, it isn't enough I guess, that Arizona's citizens are violated daily. It isn't enough that law enforcement is barely permitted to exercise any measure of authority (as you hide - once again - behind unjust screams of racism.) You won't be content until you've rendered all manner of law enforcement powerless and stripped every citizen of protection - leaving them helpless targets to your precious illegal immigrants. What the hell is wrong with you? They've done nothing but make demands while violating our laws and our citizens. But you support illegal immigrants - no matter what the cost to our citizens. Tell me, how many citizens have to become victims before you get behind THEM in lieu of this storm of violence and devastation created by
02:14 PM on 05/12/2010
It is my view that Police officers, State Patrol, Sherriff, or any other law enforcer should work hand and hand with immigration officers. An officer should be able to arrest when they find illegal activity of any nature from a person of any country.
Here is a thought for States to stop funding free education for non citizens:
Require proof of legal residency when registering a child for school. The key word being LEGAL Resident.
The parent should provide a State or Federal issued ID card showing a valid address. Non residents whether legal or illegal should pay for their child’s education. In the event a parent is in the process of obtaining a green card the fee could be waived.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
A ScottMiller
02:46 AM on 05/07/2010
This is a great article. Thank you. I hadn't seen the earlier piece, but just read it.

"The annual cost of maintaining and providing services to illegal or 'undocumented' citizens should be tabulated, assumed and paid by the Government of Mexico or credited against the annual cost of oil we import from them until such time as immigrants from their country become U.S. citizens."

Can you please take up this task? Also, please don't forget to deduct the total from taxes collected. Please be sure to take into consideration that federal services should be deducted from federally collected taxes, and local services from locally collected taxes. Results would be extremely beneficial in this discussion.
photo
voyager48
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
02:45 AM on 05/06/2010
Clarence if we do the math, we can see why the Latino population is concerned. I will round out the numbers but I believe that the principles will be amply demonstrated.

The Population of the USA = 300 million
Hispanic population = 46 million

Estimated numer of illegal immigrants in 2009 = 11 million
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/ois_ill_pe_2009.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigrant_population_of_the_United_States

Estimated illegal hispanics in the US 2009 (76% of all illegals) = 8.4 million

Illegals as a pecentage of the total US population = 3.6% (approximately 1 on 30)

Population of Arizona = 6.5 million

Estimated illegal immigrants in Arizona = 500,000

Illegals as a percentage of Arizona population = 7.7% (approximately 1 in13)
http://www.stateline.org/live/ViewPage.action?siteNodeId=136&languageId=1&contentId=51473

Based on the number of arrests 2009, half of all border crossings into the USA are probably occuring in the Tucson sector. It is reasonable to assume that at least 80% of all illegals in Arizona are Hispanic.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2008/table35.xls

The bottom line is that the vast majority of illegals are Hispanic and about 1 in every 15 Hispanics in Arizona is most likely to be illegal.
photo
voyager48
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
03:01 AM on 05/06/2010
Sorry - I missed a big step in the logic.

Total Hispanic polulation in Arizona = 1.96 million
http://pewhispanic.org/states/?stateid=AZ

Hispanic Illegals in Arizona at 80% = 400,000.

1 in 5 Hispanics in Arizona is probably illegal.
01:13 PM on 05/06/2010
Legalised racism to combat illegal immigration is no substitute, whatsoever, for effective border enforcement except for the cave men and women. We need a comprehensive immigration reform to control the apologists of Nazizona's SB1070 in that territory and elsewhere.
04:56 PM on 05/06/2010
A recent study published by the Pew Center stated “There are about 10.3 million unauthorized migrants estimated to be living in the United States as of March 2004. Of these, about 5.9 million or 57% are from Mexico. The rest of Latin America (mainly Central America) accounts for another 2.5 million or about one-quarter of the total.” So according to this study 81% of the Illegal Immigrants living in the US are Latino. The remaining 19% are Asian, African, or European. This is the most recent study that examines where Illegal Immigrants in the USA have come from. An new study is now in precess.

Our anti-discrimination laws hold that the affect of any action that disproportionably affects a recognized and protected group of people that is not reflective of their proportion of the relevant population constitutes a Prima Facia case of discrimination. Therefore, if 81% of those illegally residing in the USA are of Latino origin does this not also mean that to insure no Prima Facia case of discrimination exists should not 81% of those investigated for being illegally in the USA be of Latino origin? Would not departing from that percentage be discriminatory to Black, Asian, and White Americans? Why must discrimination against non-Latino Americans be the feel-good solution for Illegal Immigrant Latino Americans?
06:17 PM on 05/05/2010
Let's get real, all right. This law is one more unconstitutional monster churned out by reactionary lawmakers. Just answer me one question and I'll shut up: What objectively-observable evidence could possibly provide "reasonable suspicion" that a person is in the country with legal authority? Neither the color of their skin, the language they speak, the place where they are found, or any other objectively-observable facts can indicate to an observer whether they have a passport or visa in their possession. So just stop with the defense of this law, that is the latest legalistic incarnation of the ever-vigilant, ever-bigoted, ever-powerful pro-white, anti-minority power structure. Just stop!
06:57 PM on 05/05/2010
OK Charles -- here is the challenge, find ONE part of the Ariz. law that is NOT ALREADY FEDERAL LAW !!! Cone on now --- the whole thinf was written with the direct aid of the former Ast. Atty. General for immagration affairs. So give me one part of the law that is not directly attributable to existing federal law. Thats your challenge
06:31 PM on 05/06/2010
Demanding a citizen provide proof of citizenship.

Supporters keep shouting illegal alien as if no one else could possibly be affected. But if you know someone is illegal you wouldn't need to ask for proof of citizenship and if you now someone is a legal alien you'd have every right to ask for papers but no need to ask for proof of citizenship.

So, obviously, you only ask for proof if you don't know if they're citizens, if they are they're not required to have papers or prove citizenship and police have no right to demand proof that they are citizens under federal law.

But under SB1070 citizens either provide proof or get arrested. And can be denied lawyers and deported as illegal aliens, none of which is legal or constitutional for citizens and none of which is of any concern to the bill's supporters.
photo
voyager48
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
01:48 AM on 05/06/2010
Az requires proof of legal residence in order to get a drivers license. The bill dictates that in the course of a lawful contact if reasonable suspicion and probable cause are felt to exist then the officer can detain the suspect but has to defer to ICE for determination of status.

Simply not being able to produce a drivers license would raise suspicion and further proof of legal driver status would then be in order. Should the suspect then fail to come up with corroborating evidence to show legal status probable cause could be used to detain the suspect. Hiibel vs the 6th Circuit Court

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-5554.ZO.html
04:37 PM on 05/05/2010
Every single politician who denied fully funding the--REAL--fence(s) emphasis on a double fence under the "2006 Secure Fence Act"should not be re-elected. Now its up to the populace of America, whose citizens and "LEGAL" residents should demand construction of the real fence. Throw out all Pro-Amnesty incumbents led by Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada.Up to 2009 a--TRILLION DOLLARS is been appropriated to fight the Iraq and Afghanistan war, but as always American taxpayers remain unprotected along the border. Prior Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said a barrier running the length of a border would "COST" too much. COST TOO MUCH? PROTECTING AMERICANS WOULD COST TOO MUCH?
01:44 PM on 05/05/2010
Mr. Jones...here's what makes this law "racist": Only a certain group of people are targeted by it...dark people. No cop in Arizona is going to stop a white person and demand to see their papers. It's not going to happen; yet there are hundreds of thousands of illegal Poles, Irish and Brits here in the US, working at jobs that Americans WOULD do. When is the last time you met a European and wondered if they had papers? Now how about a Latino...not necessarily a Mexican, but just a person with that phenotype (that means they look like something, but may not be that thing)? That's what makes it a racist law, besides the fact that racists wrote it and enacted it. Federal law makes illegal immigration a misdemeanor, so the cops now have to chase down jay-walkers, in effect, rather than, for example bank robbers? Well, THAT'S effective, isn't it?
02:26 PM on 05/05/2010
LOL...this law is racist because only a certain group of people are targeted...all laws are targeted at a small group of people....CRIMINALS...of any color or creed or religious belief...if a bank is robbed and the robber is desribed as a 25 yoa black male driving a white SUV...then questioning black males in white SUV's around the age of 25 is not "racial profiling"...it is called SUSPECT PROFILING...same thing if he was white (Caucasian)...you don't hear white folks complaining about being questioned based on race...you don't hear Latinos complaining too often except to use an excuse they heard from Jesse Jackson....when I'm asked to show my I.D. to purchase products using a credit card, I don't assume the clerk believes I can't afford the product and is checking my ID, I think he/she is doing their job is making things SAFE for the actual cardholder and preventing CRIMINAL activity....ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE IN THIS ARIZONA LAW....MAKING DAMN SURE YOU ARE A LEGAL IMMIGRANT! FROM JUST OVER THE BORDER IN MEXICO! IMAGINE THAT....NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, RIGHT?...Only, if you're an ostrich with your head underground!
02:40 PM on 05/05/2010
".if a bank is robbed and the robber is desribed as a 25 yoa black male driving a white SUV...then questioning black males in white SUV's around the age of 25 is not "racial profiling"..."

--- actually, a pretty darn good example of racial profiling, so thanks. A cop better have a better description than that before he tries to stop every black male in his mid-20s across the state and force each one to prove that he's not the criminal (rather than require authorities to prove that he is the criminal). The white SUV part is helpful only for the area around the crime and for a short time period after the crime is committed. ... But the Arizona law, of course, targets all Hispanics of all shapes, sizes, genders and ages -- legal or illegal, here for hundreds of years or arrived just last week -- for 24/7/365. And that category includes many many many more Americans than it does illegal aliens and only *certain* Americans, who have done nothing to be shoved into a category of "American" that, for some reason, has fewer rights and protections than the rest of the country.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CrestedSparrow
06:30 PM on 05/05/2010
You have just proven that it is indeed a racist law. Thank you very much. You see unless a crime HAS been committed there can be no perp and therefore no arrest; that is how a fair law is suppose to work. As an American, I am not willing to be perceived or treated like a "potential" criminal before the fact. Sorry, doesn't work for me.
photo
voyager48
Illegitimi Non Carborundum
11:09 AM on 05/13/2010
Wrong - in fact every person who is stopped is required to produce a drivers license which is proof of legal residency. Under established stop and identify case law all a non-driver is required to do is identify themselves.

Unless reasonable suspicion and probable cause criteria are met the officer has no reason or mandate to pursue any investigation. This bill simply allows this now to extend to the issue iof legal residence status where previsouly they could not.
01:32 PM on 05/05/2010
"American Indians" are immigrants, too. All peoples came from elsewhere. Do you own a house or rent an apartment? Do you allow anyone who wishes to come into your house at will? Can they occupy your space and displace you. Can they have your paycheck because they don't have one? This country has rules that exist to insure a level of fairness for all. Those who enter illegally, violate those rules. Those who condone or support that illegal act wish for special treatment. That is unfair, unjust, and discriminatory. As there is only one race (human), I will not call the sentiment racist. If Hispanics in America truly want to support equality and fairness, they would unanimously support the deportation of illegal immigrants rather than abet them in their crime.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CrestedSparrow
06:17 PM on 05/05/2010
I really, really wish folks would stop saying, "AMERICAN Indians" are immigrants, too." Do you see the problem with your statement? It is also extremely offensive so please stop it.
10:25 PM on 05/05/2010
Why are you offended? History is clear. The tribal groups that claim to be "native" to the Americas migrated here from Asia across a land bridge. Over time they spread throughout the continent, formed new tribal groups, and claimed territories that they often forcibly took from others and then defended from other tribal groups. Wars among these tribes were ongoing. They were eventually overwhelmed by the Europeans, new tribes that claimed areas and proceeded to defend them. Americans are the dominant tribe now. They have set rules to preserve the areas they claim. That makes them (us)_ no different from the Navajo, the Sioux, the Hopi, The Utes, the Illinois, the Choctaw, the Delaware, the Seminole, or many of the other tribes that existed before; except for the fact that the Americans provided protected areas for the vanquished tribes. Most "native" tribes simply killed or enslaved their vanquished.
07:04 PM on 05/05/2010
Halmor52 BRILLIANT !!!!!!
charles77
Just the Facts Please
01:25 PM on 05/05/2010
Why are’t employers arrested for hiring illegal workers?

Here is the truth.

To be legal an employer only has to request a Social Security card, photocopy it and keep it in the employees file. Fake SS cards are very easy to get. If the employer does not run it thru E-Verify, there is no way to tell if it is fake. So as long as the employer has a SS card photocopy for the employee on file, he cannot be prosecuted.

Social Security Administration sends each employer a “no match” letter at the end of the year if the Name on the card dose not match the number, BUT REQUIRES NO ACTION from the employer to correct it!

That is the truth, read our own governments website:
http://www.ssa.gov/employer/noMatchNotices.htm

Making E-Verify mandatory and enforcing Social Security Administration no match letters would solve the problem!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Verify