Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Anti-immigration Bill Pits Jewish GOPers Against House Hard-liners

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I'm trying to look at all this issues in a strictly legal view. I'm not trying to be passionate about anything or taking sides. I believe in the law. The law, by its own definition and nature, is designed to protect citizens. When a statute is modified to criminalize conduct, by reasons of common sense, it should never apply retroactively. If law was intended to apply retroactively, then the government should sanction itself for restricting women's right to vote back in the day. But INA is notorious for applying retroactive statutes in clear violation of common sense. Why is this? Because nobody cares! People often think that immigration law doesn't affect citizens while in reality, the very fact that we live in a society with immigrants means these laws affect us all.

    Comment


    • #92
      Now everybody can see that Aliba IN FACT advocates presence of TERRORISTS in the United States.
      Aliba is Muslim Arab and as such he should be traeted as a terrorist. See what legal citizens in Great Britain did to UK. Those UK Arabs like Aliba were legal citizens.

      I thought that Jewish Republicans ruled America but now they were defeated by right-wng Republican Nazis and fascists.

      Comment


      • #93
        [Houston]I'm trying to look at all this issues in a strictly legal view. I'm not trying to be passionate about anything or taking sides. I believe in the law. The law, by its own definition and nature, is designed to protect citizens. When a statute is modified to criminalize conduct, by reasons of common sense, it should never apply retroactively. If law was intended to apply retroactively, then the government should sanction itself for restricting women's right to vote back in the day. But INA is notorious for applying retroactive statutes in clear violation of common sense. Why is this? Because nobody cares! People often think that immigration law doesn't affect citizens while in reality, the very fact that we live in a society with immigrants means these laws affect us all.[/quote]

        I agree on every word you wrote here, Houston.
        Very well said!

        Comment


        • #94
          I'm trying to restrict my comments to only legal issues because, as most know or should know, nobody can be prosecuted based on race or religion (or at least, that's what the law dictates).

          When legislation is created, it can never escape the boundaries imposed by the Constitution and should not violate the rights of the individuals. This is very critical here. The United States is a country of justice that is just, not a country where arbitrary legislation is passed in the heat of the moment. You can validate this very fact by reviewing the other bills introduced by different Senators, by the way, all of them Republican as well and supported by some Democrats.

          This particular H.R. legislation is the only one that's controversial because, while being developed under the border security strategy it has little to do with border security, leaves soft spots untouched and neglects several aspects of foreign policy that should be addressed. But it does concentrate on some immigration reform, or does so partially, without consideration to the legality and fairness of such measures and the impact created on American citizens and society.

          Most things I mentioned here so far about citizen's rights and adjustment of status costs are already included and considered in most, if not all of the other (Republican) bills that are available at the Senate. This particular H.R. however fails to take them into consideration and does not preclude any ways to provide funding for the federal "prosecution" of millions of people, let alone additional expenses that will arise from such measures.

          Comment


          • #95
            Houston,
            Your arguments are clear, consistent and persuasive.

            I am well aware of Senate Bills (By Sens. McCain(R)/Kennedy(D), Sen. J.Kyl(R) , Sen. Hagel (R) . Lately discussed even by Sen. Obama(D) and Sen. Mel Martinez(R)).
            And I am also well aware of the voting record and position of Sen. Arlen Specter.
            None of the Senate introduced Bills can even remotely compare with the spirit of H.R. 4437!

            What can I say?

            Well, no matter what kind of Bill finally passess into Law, we made our voices heard and spoke for Justice, before it was too late.

            Posterity will decide the rest.

            Best Wishes,
            IE

            Comment


            • #96
              Are you saying that you think, in all honesty honestly, that the Senate is going to pass this H.R. in its current form?

              I don't even want to think about the consequences of that act, it would be hard to imagine of American legislation as arbitrary and of vengeful character.

              And this 236 issue is just one I came across with and caught my eye. How many other's could there be?

              I can imagine appeals sustained, not in favor individual defendants, but against the government and this cruel legislation. So far, the United States has been a model for fairness and equal protection when it comes to human rights, I hope this does not change in the years to come.

              Comment


              • #97
                Are you saying that you think, in all honesty honestly, that the Senate is going to pass this H.R. in its current form?
                This is what I said, Houston: "..no matter what kind of Bill finally passess into Law, we made our voices heard and spoke for Justice, before it was too late.
                Posterity will decide the rest".

                Comment


                • #98
                  I have to agree with that. Fairness is supposed to prevail in any legal system. Terrorism should be punished harshly and eradicated from U.S. soil, but that's one thing and classifying all immigrants as terrorists is another. That is what some other countries have done to cause U.S. action and intervention. Do we want to be like them? And if we say yes, then who are we then to judge other countries?
                  We now may have the "moral right" to do so, here, each and every individual is treated with respect and fairness, but that could change, soon.
                  America has every right to build a wall along the border and select who can and cannot remain in the country. That's true, but it's also true that the government owes itself to the people "by the people, for the people..." and there's a responsibility to every US family; family unity is supposed to be supported by the government as the foundation of society. One thing is breaking the law, but breaking the law when an individual acts according to it and it changes overnight is a different issue with grave implications.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    [houston]I have to agree with that. Fairness is supposed to prevail in any legal system. Terrorism should be punished harshly and eradicated from U.S. soil, but that's one thing and classifying all immigrants as terrorists is another. That is what some other countries have done to cause U.S. action and intervention. Do we want to be like them? And if we say yes, then who are we then to judge other countries?
                    We now may have the "moral right" to do so, here, each and every individual is treated with respect and fairness, but that could change, soon.
                    America has every right to build a wall along the border and select who can and cannot remain in the country. That's true, but it's also true that the government owes itself to the people "by the people, for the people..." and there's a responsibility to every US family; family unity is supposed to be supported by the government as the foundation of society. One thing is breaking the law, but breaking the law when an individual acts according to it and it changes overnight is a different issue with grave implications.[/quote]

                    Agreed.

                    Comment


                    • Massive detentions, housing facilities with millions of people incarcerated, the power to arrest without any warrants, legal tapping of phone lines for citizens, forced invasions of privacy and homes.... what's next I wonder... A reversal of history would be shameful. INA DOES PROVIDE for the deportation WITHOUT relief of all people illegally here, ENFORCE IT! No need for a preposterous new law!

                      Comment


                      • "President Bush has proposed a new temporary worker program to match willing foreign workers with willing U.S. employers when no Americans can be found to fill the jobs. The program would be open to new foreign workers, and to the undocumented men and women currently employed in the U.S. This new program would allow workers who currently hold jobs to come out of hiding and participate legally in America's economy while not encouraging further illegal behavior.
                        This legislation must also meet the Nation's economic needs and live up to the promise and values of America."

                        This is a direct quote from the GOP web site.

                        What a great statement and brilliant concepts and ideas... but then the House passed H.R. 4437.... When comparing the legislation passed by the House with the quoted statement one must conclude that:

                        "Protecting the rights" means making sure you get a conviction for a felony that wasn't even a crime but a civil offense when committed.... Arbitrary detentions without a warrant and denial of basic rights such as a phone call or legal counseling is what we now consider to be "the values of America"? ... What about the right for a speedy trial? (it is not a civil matter anymore once a charge under 18 USC is filed against the immigrant).

                        A guest worker program would be worthless if the person is inadmissible as a felon under INA. Creating an "exception" would be unfair and would protect illegal entrants over applicants who are immediate relatives of U.S. citizens and are statutory eligible to apply for benefits under current law. But it appears that U.S. citizens and their interests are no longer of any importance to this group of legislators. Not to mention that NOTHING under this new bill provides for the protection of a U.S. citizen against charges for helping an immediate relative immigrant while preparing for adjustment of status!

                        So the advise would be, exit the country and come back illegally, thus becoming "eligible". This is exactly what I call "unfairly rewarding those who came here unlawfully" a contradiction to the President's intentions.

                        I believe in the President and don't think he would sign the current legislation despite the letter sent to the house to encourage its passage.

                        Comment


                        • If HR4437 is not eventually passed into LAW, then the only purpose of this legislation is to stall any immigration reform and instead use the illegal immigrant issue for midterm congressional elections.

                          Will HR4437 pass into LAW anytime soon?
                          Hard to tell for sure.
                          On one hand, I don't think anti-immigrant hardliners really interested in eliminating all illegal immigration in such a radical way: once you do that, whom else you gonna bash and get political capital too?
                          Any other group is pretty much taboo for bashing (minorities) and would cost votes/seats in any kind of election.
                          So, it seems to be more useful to keep using the "illegal immigrant" issue from one election through another, and what better way to do that than to introduce some "unpassable" Bill, while vehemently opposing anything that makes sense?

                          On the other hand, if momentum is high and if those very hardliners recognize that it is better to seize the opportunity now or else they may never get another chance, well, then they can put a lot of pressure into passing it to law.

                          Suppose Senate takes this Bill in February and makes some sensible, comprehensible amendments.
                          Then it goes to conference.
                          During the conference talks, if House REALLY WANTS to pass its' piece of legislation without much compromise, then they can use the same tools the used in past to get their way.
                          Once it's passed both chambers, it's hard to imagine that the White House will veto it.

                          Again, it's hard to predict now what exactly will take place in few months.
                          But in any case you won't see any GW program passed in 2006.
                          ThatsI am sure about.

                          Passage of laws aimed at enforcement alone are possible and very likely (I long ago predicted it), but it's likely to happen in "increments".

                          Indeed, it's the very extreme nature of HR4437(making felons of 11 mln. people, while providing no resourses to enforce it) that makes me think it is not meant to pass into law, but rather to stall the Immigration Reform before mid-term elections, and use whole issue, instead, for "talks" before constituents.

                          I shared my views about "dynamics" of this process under the another thread.

                          You can look it up at:

                          http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums/a/...21#87010376921


                          Best Wishes,
                          IE

                          Comment


                          • The irony of the issue is that H.R. 4437 is NOT an "enforcement only" bill. Enforcement is different than reform. This bill DOES include immigration reform, directly affecting INA the same way the 96 legislation did. It's NOT, I repeat, an enforcement bill. The interests of U.S. citizens are NOT considered under this bill, nor are the interests of numerous american families.

                            Like I mentioned, the bill does have many provisions for enforcement but also provisions for reform, reforms that do not match the presidential intentions, the opinions of most circuit courts and the common principle of fairness that is the very foundation of any democratic nation.

                            Comment


                            • I agree with you, Houston.

                              All being said, we are the momentary spectators of this fascinating wonder called LIFE.
                              LIFE consist of CYCLES. Nothing is permanent. Everything will pass. And Day will follow the Night, just as Night will follow the Day..


                              I am TAOsist, by the way.

                              Comment


                              • ..

                                Comment

                                Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

                                Home Page

                                Immigration Daily

                                Archives

                                Processing times

                                Immigration forms

                                Discussion board

                                Resources

                                Blogs

                                Twitter feed

                                Immigrant Nation

                                Attorney2Attorney

                                CLE Workshops

                                Immigration books

                                Advertise on ILW

                                EB-5

                                移民日报

                                About ILW.COM

                                Connect to us

                                Questions/Comments

                                SUBSCRIBE

                                Immigration Daily



                                Working...
                                X