By Peter Prengaman ASSOCIATED PRESS 12:28 a.m. April 12, 2007 LOS ANGELES – Illegal immigration opponents have sued the Los Angeles Police Department, taking aim at its long-standing policy of ignoring most suspects' immigration status. The lawsuit filed Wednesday in Superior Court seeks to force officers to inform federal immigration officials when illegal immigrants are arrested on drug charges. The department prohibits officers from inquiring about the immigration status of suspects, a policy strongly supported by Police Chief William Bratton and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The lawsuit was brought on behalf of unidentified police officers who are afraid to speak out but argue the policy creates a situation where the same illegal immigrants are repeatedly arrested when they could have been deported, lawyer David Klehm said. “Everyone I spoke to told me their hands were tied with this policy,†Klehm said. The lawsuit relies on a section of the state's Health and Safety Code that states that in drug cases involving a non-citizen, “the arresting agency shall notify the appropriate agency of the United States having charge of deportation.†Los Angeles police officers do not ask about immigration status while interviewing victims, witnesses and suspects, and do not arrest people based on immigration status. Officers do involve immigration officials if a suspect is a gang member who has been previously deported or if a suspect is arrested for a felony or multiple misdemeanors. Bratton has argued that the police department does not have the resources to work as immigration agents. Klehm, an anti-illegal immigration activist based in Orange County, filed a similar lawsuit against the San Jose Police Department a few weeks ago. _______________________________________________ It's unbelievable how far this country goes to protect the rights of illegal criminals! I hope they win the lawsuit!
Exactly why you should direct your anger at your own government, not the illegal aliens. The US laws allow illegal immigration. The system is set up to allow the flow of cheap labor into the country ON PURPOSE.
The immigration law today requires an overhaul, requires fair and reasonable laws to allow for legal immigration and reduce the illegal flow. It is the law today creating the situation by extreme restricion of legal immigration, not the result of the law it created the situation you have now.
Actually, the more I read and learn, I know our government has not done their part on controlling this problem. Surprisingly, Iperson, I also support fair immigration reform legislation (as long as it doesn't include a blanket amnesty clause).
If the US government didn't fix the immigration law after 1986, whose fault is today's situation? The blame is on the government, they broke it, so let them fix it, but why by punishing millions of people for their own mistake and lack of good law??
Nobody here can say that the U.S. Government intentionally and recklessly decided to promote illegal immigration, that wouldn't be true. I believe the problem is simply a failure to consider the real implications of legislation as applied to living human beings as opposed to charts, equations and models.
When the 1996 reform was passed, it contained many new and tougher provisions that were aimed mostly at reducing illegal employment. But no real thought was given to the cost of actually prosecuting such offenses criminally, so you have a world were employers are immune not because of the lack of a penalty but simply because it's too expensive to enforce the law in a criminal court. The only people who pay the price is the aliens, who are removed, but most importantly, their families and children.
Little consideration was given to the very real fact that immigration law touches the lives of many citizens in a personal and direct way. The law doesn't promote family unity, doesn't provide effective mechanisms for employers in need of alien labor, INA's grounds of inadmissibility and removal are cumbersome and outdated and the waiver authority is problematic.
As inconceivable as it sounds, there's provisions built into INA that, under certain circumstances, could make a criminal of any person who simply is not blind and is able to think, requiring no intent and no action whatsoever. This is not a joke, it's a reality. These provisions have been branded as "draconian and irrational" by many commentators, but there's still in existence today. It's provisions such as those that render STRIVE ineffective when seen in the general context of all applicable law, new legislation has to be new, a new approach, not merely more enforcement and some legalizations. Immigration law does not operate in a vacuum, it's applied along with all other statutes in the United States Code.
The policy has failed and not there's lots of people who now blame states for not doing their "share". But states are not obligated to enforce immigration law, states do what's better for them, and that will not change.
A complete overhaul of the law is required, a complete redefinition of the mission of certain agencies would be a big improvement, but all this takes time and a lot of effort. When it comes to real reform, I don't have any rational expectations of seeing a truly comprehensive bill being debated in Congress any time soon.
I don't blame the Government, I don't blame Congress, to me the problem is one of imagination, of the lack thereof. Nobody thought it could happen, but it has. Now, it's time to put past experience and gained knowledge to good use and design effective, rational, humane and enforceable law, and Congress is more than capable of that.
Originally posted by iperson: If the US government didn't fix the immigration law after 1986, whose fault is today's situation? The blame is on the government, they broke it, so let them fix it, but why by punishing millions of people for their own mistake and lack of good law??
I was agreeing that our government hasn't done a good job of controlling illegal immigration; however, I do not believe the illegals who crawled over our fences, snuck across our borders, entered into sham marriages and such are innocent victims either. So the government is not wholely responsible here. The illegals who broke our laws should bear some of the burden as well.
I didn't say victims, I said "the only ones who pay the price".
I have to agree that there has to be punishment for violations, otherwise the law would be meaningless, but you need to look at things for what they really are.
The "sham marriage" disgrace would be easily solved by granting the benefit to the family and not to the alien, as I proposed. I saw another post about some marriage that lasted for a few months, that alien would be in removal proceedings now to explain to a judge all relevant facts of the case. No need for the "victim" to file charges or even a complain. Every marriage would be investigated but only upon real probable cause, avoiding the degrading "witch hunts" we see today.
There's also a lot of people who enter to engage in crime, specifically violent gang crimes. Gangs are domestic terror, and an alien who enters the U.S., lawfully or otherwise, to contribute to the chaos of gang activity should be imprisoned and removed. These are crimes of violence and voluntary participation in such crimes requires a level of criminal intent that would negate any "good faith" defense.
But then there's many other people who enter the country for good reasons, looking for a better life. I believe these entries should be regulated by an effective and realistic program, but such program does not exist. Many women come to the U.S. seeking the protection of the Courts against constant abuse, threats and violence, and that has to amount to reasonable fear and cause. Many come to be reunited with families. Many come simply as a matter of life and death trying to earn a living.
I don't think that an amnesty and more enforcement is going to do anything at all. That approach has been tried twice already with no effect, why would it be any different now? Look at some of the issues that are currently present in the law and are being ignored by most "comprehensive" initiatives:
- An immediate relative who erroneously claims citizenship is removed without relief. A violent criminal is not. - The alien relative described above has no opportunity ever again apply for a benefit. An alien who has been a member of a criminal gang may apply even without a waiver in most cases. - A person who used a controlled substance decades ago for a short while is forever inadmissible. A person who committed a horrible crime of violence many years ago may apply for a waiver. - Arriving aliens in removal are not allowed to apply for AOS, but at the very same time, they are. This made so much sense that the AG voluntarily removed the restriction to make sense of an otherwise unenforceable regulation in light of the massive criticism by the Courts after Succar (1st Circuit). - An alien soldier puts his life on the line for "HIS OR HER" country, but if he erroneously claims to be a citizen he is removed and never allowed back.
I could keep going on and on... but there's no point.
The only solution is a change in the law, a complete overhaul to provide for realistic mechanisms that promote legal immigration.
I was replying to Iperson's post, not yours. Her post made it out that our government is the only one at fault here. I was debating her point - that's all.
Let me ask you indignant ProudUSC- when you don't fix a leaking faucet are you angry at running water or yourself for neglecting to fix the problem? Are you punishing water? Bad, bad water.
Humans, like Houston intelligently noticed, are humans and they fall under human, natural laws, not artificial ones created to fit tables, statistics and appease irrational fears. The natural law is the one of supply and demand and the US government neglects the natural laws. This is a mistake, as it has been a mistake for thousands of years, at least from Sophocles's "Antygone". Great empires have fallen, others have risen, and those have fallen as well, but humanity and human laws prevail. There long won't be the United States of America, but there will always be humanity.
Originally posted by iperson: Let me ask you indignant ProudUSC- when you don't fix a leaking faucet are you angry at running water or yourself for neglecting to fix the problem? Are you punishing water? Bad, bad water.
Humans, like Houston intelligently noticed, are humans and they fall under human, natural laws, not artificial ones created to fit tables, statistics and appease irrational fears. The natural law is the one of supply and demand and the US government neglects the natural laws. This is a mistake, as it has been a mistake for thousands of years, at least from Sophocles's "Antygone". Great empires have fallen, others have risen, and those have fallen as well, but humanity and human laws prevail. There long won't be the United States of America, but there will always be humanity.
Okay, Iperson. I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. And you're wrong about the United States. She's still a wonderful country who will prevail through all of this illegal immigration mess.
This entire illegal immigration problem is nothing other than supply and demand. Let’s see from economic perspective. Business want cheap labor (demand) and Mexican want dollar (supply) and politican are busy getting reelected rather than seriously reforming immigration law.
If business do not hire, Mexican will not be crossing border. But businesses need these people and businesses are greedy also. And politician can not come up with any meaningful legislation. Congress did pass tough 1996 law which made matter even worse creating even more illegal immigrants.
Guest worker program and tough border program are good start. Bottom line, with supply and demand in check, our congress and govt has to work seriously to reform our system rather than appearing on daily night news like CNN, MSNBC, FOX etc.
Funny how folks make assumptions. Lots have been made about me, usually wrong, lots have been made about others I'm sure, and I bet you they've been wrong as well. But you know what's really bad? When people make assumptions and formulate ideas based upon those, ideas that affect people.
Think about it. I've listened to some of the immigration debate and there's this "assumption" that some immigrants send all their money "home" and that's why they don't deserve the opportunity to, eventually and after probatory periods, apply for residency and citizenship. That's one assumption.
Now, is this valid? Very few people would even think about permanently investing in an economy knowing that, at any minute, they can be apprehended and removed never to set foot in this nation again. Investments mean very long term plans, and removal forecloses on that idea.
Many of these folks have children and family at "home", people they cannot bring over to the U.S. So, what's wrong in sending money to support children? I thought the wrong thing to do was to ignore child support obligations.
So, the idea now is to offer people only a temporary status, without a chance to apply for citizenship, because they don't want to stay, they send all the money "home" anyways. However, it's that "temporary" status that will prevent a person from setting roots, causing lots of funds to be sent "home", not the other way around.
Assumptions are dangerous, seeing only what you want to see is also dangerous.
But now let's make one thing clear. Touchback or no touchback, people will brand this as amnesty regardless of penalties imposed, regulations, probation periods, you name it. It'll be an amnesty because it's not "removal" without relief. Another assumption without any legal basis.
So, iPerson, let me ask you something if I may. How would you change things to solve the problem of illegal immigration once and for all?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Houston,
Live for today and forget about tomorrow, life of a rodeo man...
Read this lady's idea printed in a local newspaper!! Intervene in Mexico As a citizen of America I am strongly opposed to amnesty of any type for the illegals living in this country. I suggest that America deploy troops to protect and escort the illegals back to Mexico. Should our troops remain there until the Mexican citizens can enact a constitution, a bill of rights and elect a government that will support the people. Once that is done, our president then should promise the Mexican citizens that if their government does not hold up its end of the bargain that he can and will send our troops back over there to ensure enforcement of a Mexican government for its people and by its people. [I can't believe the thoughts of some people. Maybe we can have another "Trail of Tears" such as when the Cherokees were driven westward to Oklahoma from Carolinas. Explora]
Add to del.icio.us
