I commend President Obama for his leadership in immigration. The Justice Department has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona's anti-immigrant law, SB1070.
The President is demonstrating his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, one of our top priorities. His challenge of SB1070 is preventing a patchwork of immigration-related state laws that could lead to rampant racial profiling throughout our country, but that does little to fix our broken immigration system.
The frustration of communities at the state and local levels shows the urgent need to fix this outdated system that keeps backlogs lengthy, families apart for years -- sometimes decades, and incentivizes undocumented immigration. We must fix this system now.
I have long been opposed to utilizing state and local law enforcement resources to enforce federal immigration law. Laws like Arizona's take away scarce resources from fighting crime. Immigrant profiling laws instill fear in our families and communities, leading to the drastic under-reporting of crime, leaving all of our communities less safe.
We must not be governed by fear. I know all too well the effects of scapegoating and racial profiling, as I was interned in a Japanese American internment camp during World War II, along with my family. I have seen how misguided attempts at law and order tear at the social fabric of our families, communities and our nation.
As national leaders, we have the responsibility to nurture a united America, and President Obama has once again stepped up to the plate.
Rep Michael Honda is the Chairman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus.
It all really just kind of make me sick, seeing the ungrateful disrespect being shown to the sacrifices made by our fore fathers.
The real argument is not about illegal aliens, as you would frame it. It's about citizens of Mexican descent being constantly harassed and asked to show their papers. It is about a violation of the constitution. There is no possible "reasonable suspicion" without depending on racial profiling and stereotypes.
Funny how the lawsuit makes no mention of racial profiling or discrimination.
With the jobless rate at all time highs, massive unemployment, and the inability of congress to pass unemployment extension why is this one of your top priorities?
It certainly isn't mine as we have adequate laws on the books that you don't bother to fund the enforcement for to make sure they're followed.
Repubs had 8 years to do something about this issue.....where was your outrage then?
Well, it didn't take very long for this article to jump the track from unbiased journalism to outright fallacy. Nothing in the remainder of the article ever brings it back to serious reporting.
Really no leadership here rather - a day late and a dollar short
Well, this isn't the case. Immigration law is a patchwork of prohibitions and its intent is to block immigration, not to control it. Reality check: blockage is not working.
What's interesting is to note that the only way some people find to fix immigration law is to add more prohibitions.
Immigrants (documented or not) are here to contribute to the greatness of this country. They have the work ethics and the push for progress. There are already enough blockages; pathways is what are needed now.
Gonzales v Peoria where the appeallate courte ruled that
...The general rule is that local police are not precluded from enforcing federal statutes. Ker v. California, 374 U.S. 23, 83 S.Ct. 1623, 10 L.Ed.2d 726 (1963); Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 78 S.Ct. 1190, 2 L.Ed.2d 1332 (1958); Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 68 S.Ct. 367, 92 L.Ed. 436 (1948); United States v. DiRe, 332 U.S. 581, 68 S.Ct. 222, 92 L.Ed. 210 (1948). Where state enforcement activities do not impair federal regulatory interests concurrent enforcement activity is authorized. Florida Avocado Growers v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142, 83 S.Ct. 1210, 1217, 10 L.Ed.2d 248 (1963). Therefore, federal regulation of a particular field should not be presumed to preempt state enforcement activityâ€
Just a thought......
- Amnesty up to reason with no criminal record with fines.
- All State governments ID's are federally certified which then are entered into a federal data base.
- Any employer hiring must verify the person status with this data base.
- Any employer with a corporate value over $100,000 if caught through selective random audits would be fined $15,000.00 (adjusted for inflation) a head. This would be a great revenue generator.
- Any individual knowingly caught hiring anyone illegal would pay a $5,000.00 fine (adjusted for inflation) and up to 30 days in jail.
Really a no brainer. Most countries do this in one fashion or another. Deporting people would be damaging to the economy and ignite civil unrest. If you think only government can solve this then your just for bigger government. This goes directly to the source of demand.
We are dealing with human enttities here!â€
In fact that sequence of events established the scenario that TRENCHANT enforcement must precede ANY changes in the immigration laws of the U.S. as relate to ILLEGAL ENTRANTS. Fines and penalties have existed for decades but were unused....except sporadically.....at the end by Bushbot. Extant law already punishes those guilty of "KNOWINGLY" hiring illegal aliens. You've stumbled across present reality.....which prevents enforcement.
As for databases, for the better part of five years, the SAVE Act, which seeks to mandate resort to the E-VERIFY system.....has been bottled up in committee....who fear its passage if introduced to the full U.S. House of Representatives.
Your suggestion(s) represents state-of-the-art legislative rudiments about 40 year ago; they've been shown to be ineffective and certainly unworkable as you outlined them....
I think a fine should be applied to all those here illegally then require continued registration for work permits, with eventual option to apply for citizenship after all fines have been paid. Anyone failing to comply would be deported and not authorized to return for 5 or more years. The fine could be maybe $5000 payable in payments if needed. Once the fine is paid they are legal and can then apply for citizenship if so desired.
I like the balance of your suggestions.
We do not need CIR. We need to control our borders and deport anyone who is not here legally. We need a biometrics ID card for legal immigrants and tough sanctions on employers who hire illegal workers. We need jobs for Americans, and we need to halt immigration until our unemployment is down to 3%. But we do not need to use the hysteria over Arizona, or over border violence, as an excuse to change the immigration laws to allow U.S. corporations to import as many foreign workers as they can find to throw more Americans out of work. No thanks.
Enforcement of EXTANT U.S. immigration law did not have to compass the matter of ethnicity; however, the number of so-called "Hispanic/Latino" violators (80%+) and their extra-territorial DEMANDS on the citizenry of the U.S. have focused attention on that cohort......to the detriment of the discussion.....
Playing their weaker hand more effectively, the hapless Democrats could feign opposition to S.B. 1070--and other measures to follow--while basically allowing Republicans to extricate the former from having to fail again at "Comprehensive Immigration Reform," another AMNESTY. ANY legislation even remotely resembling another AMNESTY will be smoked out and cost them seats in the Congress.
It cheapens American Citizenship to give even the chance at it to those who broke our laws, no matter how high flown their personal cause.
Countless millions want the American Dream. Can we give it to them all?
Is it worth so little that we give it to those who attempt to steal it? Is being a citizen of this land worth so little to We the People? And is it so cheap we would give it as dual-citizenship to the citizens of other countries who snuck in?
And isn't it asking a bit much to make 10% of the population of Mexico our citizens just because they showed up and they want us to? Would it not be better if they went home and tried it the right way like your family did?
For EXAMPLE: Mexico (a leading source of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS) has rel. abundant resources; yet, it's administration is corrupt, racked with drugs-abetted violence, and incompetent to provide the "services" which ILLEGALS soak up in the U.S. Also, despite NAFTA, Mexico has had diff. holding on to mfg. jobs which decamped from the U.S.; some have been shifted to China....!??!
I do appreciate that the Government, including the last 8 years of repub government, failed to take action on immigration, so I am glad to see that Obama is pushing it now. I do hope there will be bipartisan support for reform since this does appear to be something that the repubs want (or wanted last week before Obama started pushing it).
There is bipartisan support for reform. Where bipartisanship is lost is in the details.
It requires something that progressives say they want but don't: employer verification of citizenship and severe penalties for violation. Financial incentives to use E-Verify and ways for citizens to report voilators are a part of it too. "Go after the employers!"...OK you got it.
And if the authorities don't take action they can be sued by the citizens. Cities and towns that act as sanctuaries stand to be sued by citizens who can expect to recover damages. This will ensure the law is enforced if so many stand behind it.
All state, county and municipal agencies are required to use E-Verify.
It prohibits harboring unregistered foriegners or hiring them even for day labor.
Even if a cop never asks for ID, it may become very hard for unregistered foriegn citizens to remain in Arizona.
Even that clatter is dying away because the U.S. citizenry SEES THROUGH IT....finally and realizes that it is merely an attempt at false SHAMING.....and bugbear politics....!
Again, thanks!