For some reason beyond my capacity I can't modify the format in this article to make it fit this space. Nevertheless, the material in this is germane to our discussion of the diverse functions and powers of the various kinds of American governments and law enforcement.
It is evident that the different sheriff's departments in Arizona have been enforcing federal law with regard to immigration differently.
The sheriff in Tucson has been rounding up illegals all along. Others have not. The sheriff in this article has his men out doing patrols in the desert, and not just to rescue the immigrants from dehydration and death.
This reflects my experience of local law enforcement in Virginia and other states.
Yes, American local law enforcement picks and chooses which federal laws it wishes to place emphasis on.
The new Arizona law is designed to force uniform enforcement of federal immigration law on all Arizona police. pl
http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978210158
An Early Good Morning, Col. Lang
I clicked on your link and it took me to a screen where I could log on to Typepad, which I do not want to do — and I don’t think you wanted me to do, either.
Can you correct the link so we can all read the article, as you intended?
Thanks,
Joan
Col,
I don’t think that link is working. As to the Arizona law, just what conduct gives rise to probable cause to suspect that I or anyone else is in violation of immigration law? Just so I can change my behavior and not get stopped another time by an officer who felt I ‘looked suspicious’ while that particular officer was nearby?
After I prove my citizenship and the probable cause to stop me has ceased to exist will the officer honor my ‘no, you can’t search my car unless you provide me a search warrant’ response to his or her request?
By way of introduction, let me just say that I am familiar with Mexico. While in federal service, I have dealt with immigration issues and narcotics issues related to Mexico. I had the opportunity to meet with former President Zedillo at Los Pinos and I have had the opportunity to meet with various Mexican politicians from then candidate (later President) Fox on the right to C. Cardenas on the left. I like Mexico and its culture, its art, its music, its people and so on.
It is useful to try to understand what laws the various state and local agencies are trying to enforce.
For example, is the person in question in the United States legally or not? Thus, does this person have proper documentation to show their legal status?
Any US citizen going to Mexico, Canada, or anywhere else in the present world would be expected to be able to show who they are and evidence of legal entry into the country.
Also, around the world if one is working in a foreign country it is normal to have authorization from the host government and papers to show that.
In the US, we have citizens of Mexico who are here legally and who also have legal status with respect to working here. This is true for many people from all over the world working in the US.
In my earlier comments, I noted that I myself have worked with Mexicans who are here legally and they are hard working. Also, there are a lot of Mexican-Americans (US citizens) from Texas and the border states who come up to Virginia to work in agriculture or construction. I have worked with them also.
The issue is the ILLEGAL aliens from Mexico (or anywhere else): they are present in our country illegally and they are working illegally. They have broken the law by illegally entering our country and they continue to break our laws when they engage in work here.
Fairly clear cut distinction then between foreign guest workers legally here and illegal aliens.
It is not known how many ILLEGAL aliens are present in the US. Press estimates this past week reporting on Arizona talk about an estimated 11 million nationwide. But this could well understate the matter. Maybe we are looking at 20 or 30 million here whether full time or moving back and forth across the border.
ALL of the arguments we see in the press and national discussion today were raised back at the time of the Simpson-Mazzoli legislation in the early 1980s. This includes the “amnesty” provision which granted illegal aliens in this country access to legal status and even citizenship. So you break the law, enter illegally, work illegally, and then can get citizenship.
The demographic is this country has shifted with the African-American minority being overtaken now by the Hispanic minority. What has been the role of US immigration legislation facilitating this?
The issue of public services for illegal aliens and their children such as hospital access and school access were also raised in the 1980s. The cost issue was raised in debate as well.
Constitutional issues were raised and some contended that because of a lack of Congressional legislation on some contentious issues, the Supreme Court was forced to be lax on various immigration matters.
The government of Mexico behaved in the same way back then as today. The US pro-Mexico lobby (Hispanic Lobby) behaved the same way. Both interfaced to target those who desired a realistic and tough approach to illegal immigration.
As I have pointed out, the Mexican economy’s failures combined with a rapidly rising birth rate by the 1980s played the key roles in causing cross-border illegal migration. Take a look at the economic statistic for the period 1980-1990 and then take a look at border arrest for immigration violation rates, and other indicators. Talk to law enforcement officials who have to deal daily with the issue.
“White” “Anglo” Americans would do well to take a summer vacation along our southern border to see the chaos there and talk with folks with direct experience.
A student in one of my W and L classes on world politics two years ago was from a border town in Texas. When we touched the topic of migration as a factor in global politics I asked him to give his impression to the class of his own personal experiences in Texas. The “white” middle class and above students in the class were astounded. It was as if their fellow classmate was from Mars…they could not believe the level of violence he described and some of his and his families personal experiences.
Students were totally shocked when his talked about the “Zetas” crime family. When he mentioned that these terrorist mobsters had actually been trained by the US military and then “went bad” the room was basically silent and students did not know how to react…as I have some background in counternarcotics, I was able to pick up and explain the narco angle here: cocaine and heroin.
Many “White” Americans live in a rather removed state from what is really transpiring in this country. not to mention the world. Their television-entertainment-media intake has removed them from reality and they are sleepwalking through a rapidly changing and dangerous world.
The politicians they elect don’t want to be on the wrong side of either the pro-Mexico or pro-Israel lobbies.
My discomfort with redundant enforcement structures, redundant responsibilities, questions of accountability and chains of command aside … I understand that local law enforcement has an auxiliary function as far as enforcement of federal law is concerned, i.e. a secondary role. In Germany that is called Amtshilfe, you may call it ‘inter agency assistance’ in the US. That is only practical, given that local cops are usually the first at the scene. So far so good.
What I see is that local enforcement of federal law is not much of a practical problem as long as the majority of the people in the county agree with the sheriff that he enforces those federal laws he chooses.
I wonder whether in a staunchly conservative or even anti government county, the consensus would go far beyond a least common denominator – i.e. it is probably relatively easy to find support for enforcing federal immigration laws. I also see that to an extent the fact the Sheriffs are elected prevents abuse (while on the other hand that very fact can politicise law enforcement).
I see problems as soon as we come to the more contested ‘liberal’ sort of laws, like federal gun laws, environmental laws and the like. Or think of a Sheriff trying to enforce federal mining safety laws in Don Blankenship county in West Virginia. He’d see himself pushed out of office, if he is lucky.
That is to say, I think that the enforcement of federal laws through sheriffs is only practical in a narrow field of application.
As a practical example of the law enforcement issue.
Here in central Virginia, there is a very successful building contractor who buses Bolivian stone masons (who reportedly are not in legal status) into the area from northern Virginia.
Because the successful contractor can exploit his illegal foreign workers by paying them low wages, he is able to underbid other LOCAL building contractors for various masonry work.
The activities, including specific locations and job sites, of this contractor have been reported to local law enforcement and to the INS office in the Valley.
Neither local law enforcement nor the INS, took or wishes to take, action.
This example can be applied to the landscape installation and maintenance area as well, for example, here in Virginia.
Just last week a crew of Mexicans (legal status unknown) was stripping paint and repainting a historic multimillion dollar property in Albemarle County. The crew boss was African-American and the white contractor arrived at the job site in a nice new Cadillac, according to someone I know who was present.
The situation is not different in neighboring North Carolina from what I hear from local elected officials in Charlotte, for example.
CP
In the balance most Americans want the county sheriff to be “under the gun” for election. It is true that local control and largely local funding makes local police and most especially the sheriff vulnerable to citizen and/or business pressure. On a net basis, we think that is worthwhile.
“Federal gun laws?” Registration of dealers and a requirement for a federal license to own a fully automatic weapon? I own several firearms and am a Life Member of the NRA. I don’t hear any of my fellow gun owners complaining about these federal laws.
Fred
A lot of the people who are so worked up about the AZ law are simply opposed to effective US control of immigration.
I have carried a federal ID card since 1962 and have produced it and my driver’s license on demand from competent authority. I do not feel oppressed by that. Why should you? pl
Col,
I’ve done the same thing though being younger just haven’t done it as long. I’m not oppressed, though there is a sense of unease about the situation. A number of folks I’ve talked to here expressed the views I posted. Just as in Clifford’s first post, many are out of touch with their own country. As Clifford’s second post makes clear, there are plenty of business owners undercutting the ‘local’ competition by a hiring illegals to bring down wages. During the two years I lived in Dallas I saw this was a common occurrence. Many who complained about illegal immigration also took advantage of the ‘low cost’ services whether lawn care, house keeping or a simple car wash.
I just want to say thanks for sticking with this blogging Col.
Mr. Lang,
I have no doubt that you are a law abiding citizen and handle your guns responsibly. I am not against guns, I don’t think they’re evil. I even like shooting. My point is that I don’t think that citizens with a persistent fear that the government is going to take their guns away, and these people exist in America, share your reasonable views on the matter or gun regulations, or a Sheriff’s reasonable views for that matter.
And as for the ID card, as a German, I have had one since I got 16 and showed them on request, and I don’t feel oppressed either.
Doesn’t this law violate the 4th Ammendment because it disregards the necessity of having a warrant?
Although the Obama Admininstration does not seem to have a regard for this ammendment, what are the chances of this bill being ruled unconstitutional?
I found a 2007 letter from the Prince Willian County Attorney to the Board of County Supervisors detailing the local law enforcement response to illegal immigration on the PWC government site.
http://www.pwcgov.org/docLibrary/PDF/006894.pdf
It was the PWC attorney’s legal opinion that local law enforcement officers in Virginia can arrest anyone when all of a set of circumstanses are met. The person must be suspected (reasonable suspicion) of commiting a crime or be chargedby ICE with a crime. “Local law enforcement officers in Virginia are not by any provision of Virginia law to arrest a person when ICE has taken no action against the person; [or] ICE is taking no more than civil action against him or her.” This seems to be the basis for needing the 287(g) authority and training. What the border states’ laws say may be totally different.
All the documents on the PWC police and government sites show the concern for legal and human rights of all involved (including the illegal immigrants) in enforcing immigration law in PWC. Although it won’t show up in the MSM, I bet local officials in Arizona are going through the same careful process. I think this local approach coupled with an increased emphasis on enforcing laws targeting the employment of illegal workers could eventually force the federal hand in addressing this inherently federal problem.
Col. Lang:
In my experience, becoming a Sheriff means you’ve got to get elected. If you’re going to get reelected you’ve got to be able to work with the political power structure that runs the county you’ve been elected to police.
At a practical level that means occasionally hiring the DA’s nephew as a deputy even though the nephew couldn’t stock the shelves at the local convenience store. Doing favors for the mayor who needs to have his daughter’s wedding reception protected. Making sure the ‘right’ local business men are being used as vendors for the jail and so on. Law enforcement, especially in rural areas is seldom held to a statewide standard because that standard doesn’t exist!
Arizona county law enforcement is likely suffering from all those problems. To say nothing of the fact that the new legislation in Arizona also potentially subjects the individual peace officer to being sued if he/she is believed by a citizen to not be enforcing the law ‘correctly.’ I can’t think of any other instance in law enforcement where this is the case.
Expecting that these Sheriffs will be able to or even want to adopt a standard of enforcement that may be incompatible with their very survival in office strikes me as a difficult task indeed.
Col. Lang:
My apologies to the State of Arizona. I spoke too hastily in my earlier comment. Arizona does have a Peace Officer Training and Standards (POST) program that defines what training a peace officer must have in order to receive a state certificate as a peace officer. That these standards are sometimes not honored at a local level as carefully as they might need to be goes without saying.
My other comments, however, regarding rural jurisdictions needing to view law enforcement in the context of the cultural mores of the local community and that this approach often results in one county enforcing laws that another county might ignore still obtain.
alnval
I don’t see anything wrong with that kind of constituent service. Why are the things you mentioned “problems?”
There is a logical inconsistency in your position. On the one hand you say that sheriffs are subject to constituent pressure and on the other you object to a law that makes them vulnerable to citizen action seeking to make them enforce the law whether or not their personal electoral interests are adversely affected. pl
alnval
“results in one county enforcing laws that another county might ignore still obtain.”
Good. pl
TTG
“must be suspected (reasonable suspicion) of commiting a crime”
Entering the US or residing therein illegally is a crime. pl
My Tea Party friend and neighbor says the Federal government doesn’t enforce the immigration laws as illegal immigrants are a great source of revenue for them. Supposedly, a lot of illegals use fake Social Security numbers and the SS taxes are taken out of their pay, sent to DC but they will never collect SS down the road so it’s “free money” for the Feds. Nothing is free for the States and local municipalities though as they have to fund medical care and schooling for those same illegals. I don’t know if he’s correct or not.
burdens of proof
1. articuable basis of suspicion (terry vs. of Ohio)
needed for a stop cop must be able to talk about it. reason to detain and ask questions. needed for traffic stop or street stop. no seat belt. bulge in pocket, etc.
I had a law professor always bring the point home by saying a person would be crazy not to put his/her seatbelt on and give the officer an excuse to find the cocaine in the glove compartment! (search incident to a stop!)
2. probable cause. more likely or not that a crime occurred. this is what a magistrate needs for a summons or warrant for arrest. or grand jury for indictment.
2.5 clear & convincing. intermediate standard needed in social services cases.
3. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. what a jury needs to convict. convinced to a moral certainty.
i haven’t practiced law in 9 years now- just what i remember from the top of my head.
With respect to the documentation issue, I will bring up again the idea that Mexican guest workers in the US have an official ID-credential (cedula)issued by the government of Mexico in conjunction with the US government. Allocation of these credentials could be at the level of millions, if desired, given modern IT.
Again, a distinction must be made between legal guest workers and other resident aliens with proper papers/visas, green cards etc. issued by our consulates etc., and illegal aliens.
For those who seek legal temporary, seasonal, annual employment in the US, this would be helpful. For both the US and the Mexican governments this would also be a good area for close cooperation. We are already cooperating in law enforcement and a range of issues anyways.
I would note that illegal Mexican and Central American aliens in the US are preyed upon not only by exploitive US employers. These communities are preyed upon by organized Hispanic criminal gangs and violence, narcotics, and so on are involved. Logically, an illegal alien so preyed upon in the US is not going to go to the police.
I would also raise the issue of how the Mexican government treats illegal aliens entering Mexico from Guatemala and El Salvador, thus violating Mexico’s sovereignty.
I have mentioned the massive presence in the US of violent Hispanic criminal organizations from Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador. Every local law enforcement officer across the United States is aware of this and many have to contend with this.
The Justice Department and federal authorities brief local law enforcement about this threat and offer assistance on any Hispanic organized crime/gang related situations. Our local police here have been fully briefed on this, are fully aware of this, and are appreciative of the level and quality of federal support offered.
Hispanic organized crime gangs operating in my general area are quite well armed according to law enforcement officials with whom I have spoken. As they deal in narcotics (methamphetamines etc) and engage in other profitable situations, they have plenty of money to purchase large capacity Glocks and all the rest.
PL,
“Entering the US or residing therein illegally is a crime. pl”
I am in violent agreement with you on this point. An “undocumented immigrant” is commiting a crime just by being here. It makes me wonder why PWC and Arizona are going through all these legal and legistative maneuvers to have their law enforcement officers get the criminals off the street. I would think it would be more a question of allocating sufficient resources to adequately enforce existing laws. The problem is what to do with these criminals once they are arrested. ICE probably won’t accept them for detention and deportation. I don’t know if state and local authorities can prosecute and/or deport illegal aliens… or if they would dare touch this politically explosive problem even if they could legally do so.
I would like to raise one point. It seems that many people seem to feel that illegal immigrants have violated the law and implicit in that is the feeling that there should be some punishment for it.
However, also implicit in the Constitution is that there might, from time to time, arise laws that are immoral or unacceptable. Do you think the immigration laws are good or fair laws? Keep in mind that there are many millions of our countrymen who feel they are not – that is why they are marching in the streets. They want the law changed.
Simply because a President or a Governor has signed in a law does not make it ethical. To always believe otherwise is to lay the foundation for a tyranny.
Myself, I don’t know. I realize that the US cannot support a sudden population increase from 300 million to 6 billion. On the other hand, I don’t think that a person who has spent all but one year of their life in the US should be deported. Where does one draw the line? I don’t know.
I do have a suggestion, though. If you deport someone, find out how much they have paid into the system in terms of Medicare and Social Security taxes. Subtract the price of a ride home from that, and give them the rest of the money they have earned.
BR
I am not interested in punishment of those apprehended here in an illegal status. I am only interested in deporting them expeditiously. Smuggling or other non-immigration connected crime is another matter.
“Civil disobedience” to the law as a protest is a long honored tradition in the US, but it is understood in this tradition that punishment for this to be expected and accepted.
I will say again that the outrage expressed by many is outrage that seeks an end to US control of its own borders. pl
I do not expect the effort to force local LE to enforce this will be successful.
The police that have to cruise these neighborhoods need a working relationship with the inhabitants. They need victims of violent crimes to report them. Primarily they tend to see their role as being the guys who take out the true scumbags: Thieves, muggers, rapists, drug dealers, and the like, not harass Pedro the painter trying to feed four kids. Human nature.
Laws that exist in certain states, such as California, that actually forbid questions from police and DMV as to nationality are widely seen by LE as useful in the field. They do not wish to have the ability to solve major crimes inhibited.
The deep flaw in all this is not the wish to clean up illegal immigration, it’s in expecting local law enforcement to do it while the door remains wide open for illegal alien employment. The idea you had that the time has come for a national ID is IMHO exactly right. Create a system by which employers can be held to account for the employment of illegal aliens, and thereby reducing the task to managable levels. Until this is done, expect lip service only to this from many officers.
When I was a prosecutor, we deported hundreds and hundreds of illegals.
What is to stop them from returning to the US?
My point, seal the borders first. It is a prerequisite to all else. Imo, sealing the border is a higher national security priority than our ME adventures. And due to limited resources, the USG/American people must prioritize…and quickly.
> “White” “Anglo” Americans would do well to take a summer vacation along our southern border to see the chaos there and talk with folks with direct experience.
What chaos would such vacationers see? I’ve spent most of the last decade in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, have numerous Anglo and Hispanic acquaintances there, and have somehow missed out on the chaotic conditions. As have, apparently, the large number of Anglo-American (and Anglo-Canadian and Franco-Canadian) “Winter Texan” annual visitors.
The actual chaos that’s growing in northern Mexico is certainly a serious concern and there are some regional problems, but life in the LRGV generally isn’t a lot different than in many other places the US.
BTW, checking the stories in border newspapers can be informative:
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/
http://www.valleymorningstar.com/
http://www.themonitor.com/
http://www.lmtonline.com/
http://www.elpasotimes.com/
http://www.demingheadlight.com/
http://www.douglasdispatch.com/
http://www.svherald.com/
http://www.nogalesinternational.com/
Etc.
> I am not interested in punishment of those apprehended here in an illegal status. I am only interested in deporting them expeditiously.
At some point, all other considerations aside, numbers and logistics have to matter. And, if the number of illegals in the US is something like 10 million, mostly Mexican, I find it hard to imagine how either the US or Mexico could cope with the deportation problem at all, let alone expeditiously.
I would like to say that is confusing the issue somewhat. It is not the right approach to securing the borders. If the citizens were united in wanting to keep out unwanted visitors they would do so. As long as there are people in the US who offer jobs, refuge, and other assistance to people who have not the proper documentation, those people will continue to come. There are no walls high enough to keep people out if there are those on both sides who want to facilitate or encourage entry.
Take away the reason for people entering the US without permission and this immigration problem will go away.
perhaps repeal NAFTA, or go after everyone who employes illegals. of course you would also have to be prepared to pay more for fruit and vegetables, processed beef, gardening, maid service and just about every other service.
there is a small chance that US employment might go up as well.
what’s not to like?
Col. Lang:
Appreciate your comments. I have a little difficulty, however, understanding how you are using the concept of constituent service in the context of law enforcement.
In a broad sense a community will often define how it wants its citizens to be served by their police. For example, an incorporated city that is largely a bedroom community may prefer that its police officers not incarcerate intoxicated or disorderly citizens but make sure they get home safely even if it means that the officers do the driving.
In the case of the DA the community was not well served when he pushed his nephew on a department who did not believe him qualified. The resulting lawsuit was expensive. Similarly, ignoring the competitive bidding process in order to use a vendor who was a friend of the sheriff was an accident waiting to happen and did.
I also believe that providing security services for the Mayor at taxpayers expense without a clear need to protect against genuine criminal behavior is something better done by Wackenhut.
I also object on principle to the notion that the validity of the beliefs of citizens as to how a law enforcement agency should function is entitled to be heard and tested in court as a matter of law. For me, it’s a bit like passengers on a ship being routinely entitled to second guess and take to court the decisions of the ship’s Captain even though they may know nothing about the Captain’s job.
Although a law may entitle the citizen to take this action it does not require the Captain to continue to serve in the face of such a travesty. Needless to say, when Captains ignore their ethical and professional responsibilities in order to ensure that they get reelected the system is broken. Some, I think, would argue that we as a country are at that point now.
Mr. Lang:
I agree with your take on immigration by and large.
I wish to point to two problems if your prefered desire to deport them all woud succceed:
! ., Immediate you may loose up to 11 million consumers, with dire consequences re housing [empty places if which you already have too much due to foreclosures etc], dire consequences for food reatail, low cost other stores — more empty malls, more bankrupcies.
2., the problem of demographics – USA whites and Afro-Americans do not reproduce at replacement rate according to USA Census Bureau, which in long term will cause the Japan syndrome too few workers for retirees.
This problem is almost as untractable as the ME I/P fiasco.
Sir and Twisted Genius: There are three overlapping issues in regard to what AZ is doing. 1) The Sheriff of Tucson, who has made it clear he won’t enforce the new law because it is largely unnecessary, is doing what you all are describing: when his deputies and/or investigators have a reason to stop someone, if they then have a reason to suspect that person is in the US illegally, then they follow up and if this is the case the individual is turned over to ICE. 2) This is not the case in Maricopa County, which is, essentially, the poster boy example for an out of control elected sheriff. Sheriff Arpaio, one of the people who pushed the just passed legislation behind the scenes has hired the KS attorney (and candidate for KS Secretary of State), who works for INLI, which is the FAIR legal institute and is the actual author of the AZ law – Pearce simply submitted it, to train the Maricopa deputies on how to enforce the new law. Moreover, Korbach, the KS attorney in question, is also the author of the amendment just passed to clarify when an appropriate contact is – he’s also got a long history of minority voter suppression activities, which is why AG Ashcroft had to reassign him. Sheriff Arpaio had his ICE accreditation pulled from him because of his out of control conduct, has had the accreditation of his jail pulled because of failure to comply with even the most basic of health requirements, faces over 2,700 civil rights complaints with the Department of Justice, and routinely, working with the Maricopa County attorney, uses his office for political intimidation of city, county, and statewide elected officials, other law enforcement, and has problems understanding where his jurisdiction boundaries end. So this brings us to 3) The real issue here is how does one identify someone as being an illegal? Skin color? Accent? Dress? Shoes? That’s the problem – how on a traffic stop in a state with a 30% hispanic population, either born in the US or legally emigrated, are you going to be able to tell that someone is an illegal?
And since the AZ legislature is now working on legislation that would bar teachers with noticeable accents from teaching English as a second language in AZ schools, I’m personally having a little trouble believing that bigotry isn’t a driver of this stuff for some of its supporters. There is no doubt that we need to get a handle on border security, illegal entry and immigration, abuse of illegal immigrants for cheap labor and indentured servants, the illicit trade in drugs and people, etc – I just don’t see the people that are pushing this bill, or variants of it in legislatures in places like OH, as really that concerned with it. Rather they seem very concerned with making life difficult for all immigrants, or hispanics, or both.
I cannot comment on this issue, but what piques my curiosity are the unintended effects of Arizonas legislation, specifically the economic effects.
It is going to be instructive to watch what happens in Arizona if the law is fully implemented.
The incongruity of the entire Open Borders/Amnesty movement is that Shakira and Ricky Martin are speaking out against this law, Chicago is holding protests, and San Fransisco is pleading with the MLB to not hold the All Star Game in Phoenix.
Meanwhile not a word from the celebrities about the Pinal County deputy who got shot by an AK 47 by drug smugglers (excuse me, undocumented border crossers, just doing the jobs Americans won’t), Chicago is asking for the National Guard to help protect its streets, and San Francisco is apparently happy to enforce policies that hurt our black underclass the most to appeal to a brown one.
And then Joe Biden has the sack to complain about the state law. Hey Joe, I used to live in Delaware too. I never heard you raise a peep when the illegal aliens were busy working for Perdue and Tyson chicken in lower Delaware and killed a few of your constituients drunk driving without a license. Not to mention driving down the wages and making it impossible for you to get a job unless you were willing to work for three dollars an hour.
The new euphemism for illegal aliens should be “future Democratic voters”.
The more I read about the rest of the country’s total hysteria and hypocrisy, the more disgusted I get. Deport them all. I long for the day Operation: Wetback II gets approved.
walrus
There is no reason that a legal “guest worker” program can not be worked out that would provide the labor and protect all involved.
As I said earlier my preference would be for an arrangement that would de-couple citizenship and residence/economic activity. such an arrangement would also require documentation of individuals and ID cards.
This will not occur because the Mexicans know that if that happened we would soon own their country. pl
alnval
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheriffs_in_the_United_States#Virginia
I see that you live in the NW.
I don’t know what sheriffs are like there. Here in the Old Dominion I have experience of the sheriiffian process in two settings, rural Shenandoah County and the incorporated city of Alexandria. In one the sheriff is the law outside of towns like Strasburg (the state police are seldom seen off the interstate I-81). In Alexanria the sheriff’s brown clad men are essentially baillifs for the commonwealth courts.
Shenandoah County has around 30,000 inhabitants and Alexandria around 130,000.
In both cases the sheriff is both a law officer and a major local political figure.
In both these jursdictions the sheriff’s that I have known were well known to the great majority of citizens. Both the incumbents are local men who had been policemen in the municipal police forces of Alexandria and Strasburg.
We tend to believe here that the law is not an expression of some abstract standard of justice, but rather a reflection of community opinion.
I expect that this situation will persist. pl
alnval
I have no problem whatever with citizens “second guessing” law enforcement. that is why policemen are now subject to lawsuits for malfeasance and also by citizen review boards. pl
Adam
Why should life not be made difficult for illegal immigrants? pl
If we are going after illegals we also need to go after those who are enticing them to become illegal, ie meat packing industry, agricultural industry, white families who want cheap nannies for their children, cheap labor to clean their homes, mow their yards and clean their cars, and businesses who can pay less for their toilets to be cleaned.
I am a believer in the right and need for the US to have control of our borders. I also believe that it should not be only the poor illegal who pays the price. Throw the illegal in jail, but throw their employer in also or fine them so heavily that it is not worth it for others to hire illegals or for illegals to cross the border.
Fat chance this will happen.
Also fat chance that all illegals will be rounded up and shipped back to whereever they came from. I live in Southern California. We do not have enough jails or holding area to hold the possibly 1 million or more Mexican illegals, I am not even counting all the Asian illegals, or Europeon illegals. Yes, Europeon, all those visitors or students who came here on holiday and never went back.
As a nurse who worked for Children and Family Services, I must also mention the possibly million children who are now American citizens who will be without parents when theirs are shipped back to where ever they came from.
Sir,
I’m not saying that life shouldn’t be made difficult for illegal immigrants, what I was trying to say, and I apologize if I was less than clear, is that in a state with a 30% hispanic population composed of legal immigrants and US citizens, that some of the people that are supporting the bill are as interested as making life difficult for hispanic US citizens and legal immigrants as they are the illegal ones. There seems to be a portion of the supporters that simply don’t like any immigrants or immigration that isn’t White, including the person who actually wrote the text of the legislation, and its intended consequence is to make anyone who isn’t White’s life miserable. This certainly isn’t the case for many/most of its supporters – they think this will actually do something about illegal immigration into the US. It won’t as the sheriff in Tucson has made clear: this legislation is unnecessary and he flat out stated on MSNBC earlier this week that he believed that it was inherently racist. What this bill does is take the out of control, bully boy tactics of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department and seeks to institutionalize them throughout the state. And since the INLI folks are now advising on this legislation in several other states, it seeks to export Sheriff Arpaio’s troubling ideas about law enforcement to OH, KY, etc.
Adam
“some of the people that are supporting the bill are as interested as making life difficult for hispanic US citizens and legal immigrants as they are the illegal ones.”
How do you know that? pl
Nancy K
Hard hearted bastard that I am, I think we should stop granting citizenship to the children of illegal migrants.
How many countries give their citizenship as easily as we do?
American exceptionalism? Nonsense. pl
AT, All,
Congress appears concerned about border violence.
1. “Hearings revive border violence debate as lawmakers ask for troops
By Jordy Yager – 05/02/10 01:50 PM ET
Drug violence in Mexico is expected to get a renewed focus in the Senate this week as a bevy of House members from the southwest region push to send more troops to the border.
The Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control takes the lead on Wednesday as it holds a long-awaited hearing on the drug trafficking violence in Mexico and the immediate implications for the U.S.
At the same time, the Senate Homeland Security Committee is set to examine the government’s crackdown on gun smuggling operations between the U.S. and Mexico during its Wednesday hearing on terrorists and guns.
The renewed attention from the upper chamber comes as a bipartisan group of 17 House lawmakers from the southwest region sent a letter last week to President Barack Obama calling on him to deploy National Guard troops to their home states as part of the “swift and decisive” action needed to combat the violence along the U.S.-Mexico border, which “continues to increase at an alarming rate.” Etc.
thehill.com/homenews/senate/95503-hearings-to-resurrect-border-violence-debate-as-lawmakers-ask-for-troops
2. “Escalating violence on the U.S.-Mexico border has U.S. lawmakers demanding to know what U.S. government agencies are doing to stem the flow of illegal weapons from the United States to Mexico, and prevent narcotics from entering the United States. The situation on the border was the subject of four congressional hearings this week.
With the Mexican government recently sending an additional 3,000 troops to the border with the United States to combat drug cartels, and Mexico’s army and police involved in increasingly violent clashes with drug traffickers, U.S. lawmakers – particularly those from border states – are more worried than ever.
California Representative Loretta Sanchez opened one of four hearings on the situation noting that Mexico now has 45,000 troops engaged in a violent struggle, which she noted is about equivalent to the number of troops the United States has in Afghanistan.
“The United States and this Congress cannot ignore our role in assisting our neighbor and our ally in this fight, and of course in preventing that violence in slipping into the United States,” she said.
Congressman Mark Souder, the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Border Subcommittee, says escalating activities of Mexican drug gangs threaten U.S. border cities and states, and have consequences well beyond the border.”…
www1.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-2009-03-12-voa84-68633392.html
3. House Hearings 2009
http://homeland.house.gov/Hearings/index.asp?ID=177
4. Congressional Research Service report on border violence issues:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41075.pdf
I would again point out that we went through ALL of this back in the early 1980s during the Simpson-Mazzoli legislation, “Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986.” Even a cursory review of the hearings and floor speeches/debates would be instructive to those now pondering these issues.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986
Sir,
FAIR and its legal institute INLI have been tracked as nativist, anti-Hispanic, and anti-immigration (legal as well as illegal) organizations since their inception. FAIR’s founder, John Taunton, is associated with a number of White Supremacist movements. Mr. Kobach, the INLI attorney who actually wrote the AZ legislation has a history of vote caging directed at minorities and his duties were reassigned at DOJ as a result. Mr. Pearce, as I indicated in comments to an earlier thread (including links), has been repeatedly identified with a leader in the neo-Nazi movement. Given that Kobach works for Taunton’s organization and wrote the bill on behalf of Pearce who openly associates with a known neo-Nazi leader, I think that provides sufficient empirical evidence that several of the people directly behind the legislation don’t like anyone who isn’t White.
As I’ve written in comments to earlier posts on this: I think what is happening is that several elites and notables with extremist beliefs are seeking to capitalize on the average citizens fears of crime and violence and are using the issue of illegal immigration as both a wedge into, and a cover for, their much broader anti-Hispanic and nativist agendas. I mispoke before, it is the Pima County sheriff, Sheriff Dupnik, who made the remarks on MSNBC. As he indicates in the article linked to below: “This is a media-created event,” Dupnik said. “I hear politicians on TV saying the border has gotten worse. Well, the fact of the matter is that the border has never been more secure.”
The article, which explains that the crime rates in the towns on AZ’s side of the border have been going down over the last several years, can be found here:http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/05/02/20100502arizona-border-violence-mexico.html
That isn’t itself a reason not to confront and comprehensively deal with the issue of illegal immigration or border security, but it does demonstrate that there has been a lot of political messaging manipulation surrounding this issue.
Sir,
One either thing, sorry I didn’t cram it into my previous response, but the actual number of illegal immigrants in the US has been steadily decreasing – starting back in 2006:http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/01/93137/recession-enforcement-driving.html
Adam,
You sound like an Open Border/Amnesty type who lives no where near the problem or thinks that making the logical leap of “having a porous border with a third world plutocracy that encourages its underclass to go north” would mean more illegal immigration = RACISMS.
Without having read the law — meaning off the cuff — my gut tells me this law will trigger a strict scrutiny judicial review. Odds of it being held unconstitutional are therefore significant, to say the least.
Barring some radically new approach, again, seal the borders (“yes, we can!” To harken to a campaign slogan that gave feel -good tingling vibes to many). And then, imo, push back on all the exceptions to the 4th amendment. It is as if we are trying to create a secure border by creating exceptions to the 4th amendment until the 4th amendment is the exception and a small one at that.
In other words, at least right now, b/c of porous borders, we try to deal with the illegal immigration problem, including increasing violence spawned by the drug cartels, by creating more exceptions to the 4th amendment that enable more arrests and lead to more deportations.
But, again, what is to stop the illegals from returning? A condition of the sentence, threatening enhanced punishment? Sure…those in the drug cartels will shake in their boots when reading the sentence sheet…
The deported, particularly those criminally inclined, will return. Only the law abiding ones will never return.
So…with a de facto open border…a cycle is created that threatens to leave the constitution in tatters and violence only increasing exponentially. As it now stands, under this approach, the only remedy is to create even more exceptions to the 4th amendment that will lead to even more deportations…and those that are deported return, so, as the wheel turns, the only remedy is to expand the reasons for a a Terry stop and so on and so on, finally demolishing what is left of the 4th amendment.
This fault does not lie with the people of Arizona. Not in the least. The fault lies with the USG. And the fact that the USG has not sealed the borders is prima facie evidence that it does not serve the people of the US. Without secure borders, the people have no choice but to choose that which leans towards a police state.
Sealing the borders, imo, is the number one national security issue in the US. Not Iraq. Not Afghanistan. IMO, sealing the borders should have been our number one priority since 9-11.
Once the borders are sealed, then step two. Determine the proper policy for those illegals in the US. That is certainly open for debate but, for what it is worth, I am for a strict path to naturalization, as I remain firmly convinced, via experience, that Hispanics make absolutely fantastic American citizens. Like countless other waves of immigrants, they want to participate in the American dream. Hard working. Family oriented. Of that, I am sure.
Tyler: As i’ve indicated in comments on the previous thread regarding this topic: I’ve resided in the Southwest, NM to be exact, and I still have strong familial ties to the area. I also grew up in FL, which has a much larger # of illegal immigrants than AZ, largely due to the migrant farmworker community, so I’ve resided in geographic proximity to the problem in two different parts of the US. As for being in favor of an Open Border/Amnesty, I’m not. I think that we have to have positive control of the border for both security and proper immigration purposes. As to amnesty – honestly I have no good idea how you deal with the 10 million or so illegal immigrants that are here. I’m not sure how all could be rounded up, especially without catching up legal immigrants or US citizens that are of the same national origin as some of the illegals by mistake.
Finally, I’ve been trying to use as fine a brush as possible here. I do think that the key people behind what AZ is doing – those who have written the legislation, underwritten the passage of it through lobbying, the AZ legislator that submitted it after it was written – certainly have racist intent, or at least demonstrable anti-Hispanic or anti-immigrant bias. I think I’ve been clear that the vast majority of people who support the legislation do not seem to have those biases or beliefs.
Finally, the legislation that AZ just passed, as opposed to what COL Lang has proposed, what Congress considered and failed to pass back in 2006, is clearly not designed to seal the border, nor is it designed to really stop illegal immigration. What it is designed to do is extend the behavior exhibited by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department to the entire state, harass and intimidate US citizens of Hispanic descent (or who simply look Hispanic), legal, and illegal immigrants, while pushing illegal immigrants into other areas – most likely TX, NM, and CA.
1. Might I suggest that we consider the situation from a US federal government perspective taking narcotics and associated crime and violence as one indicator and factor in the overall border security mix.
Dept of Justice has a National Drug Intelligence Center which publishes unclassified reports. There is plenty of open source data available to evaluate for anyone interested.
For example, we can take a 2007 South Texas/Lower Rio Grande Valley HIDTA threat assessment. Note the graphic. (I have relatives in the Lower Rio Grande Valley area whose family has been there for three generations now, Hidalgo Co., Cameron County, etc.)
“Large quantities of cocaine, marijuana, methamphetamine, and heroin enter the United States through South Texas. Most of these drugs are not intended for local distribution and are transported to other areas of the country; however, some spillover distribution does occur in the South Texas HIDTA region. Shipments destined for markets outside the South Texas border area are typically stored at stash locations in distribution centers (San Antonio, Dallas/Fort Worth, and Houston) pending transportation arrangements; shipments are also transported directly from the border region to their intended destination, but to a lesser extent.
Traffickers concentrate their smuggling operations through three major smuggling corridors within the region–Del Rio/Eagle Pass, Laredo, and the Lower Rio Grande Valley. These corridors are the main population and economic centers of the South Texas border region and create an environment conducive to drug smuggling and money laundering activities. However, drug traffickers exploit the entire length of the U.S.-Mexico border in South Texas as well as the coastal border in the South Texas HIDTA region. The South Texas border region encompasses several major land POEs that provide pedestrian, vehicular, and rail transportation options for legitimate commerce and drug traffickers. Traffickers exploit the high volume of cross-border traffic as well as the existing transportation infrastructure to smuggle large quantities of illicit drugs into the United States. The South Texas HIDTA border area is also vulnerable to drug smuggling and other criminal activities that take place between POEs. The Rio Grande River is easily breached at a number of low-water crossings by traffickers on foot and in vehicles and by maritime conveyances along deeper stretches of the river. The South Texas Gulf Coast is vulnerable to traffickers who use maritime conveyances.
The transportation infrastructure in the region, including networks of interstates, U.S. highways, and state highways, facilitates the transportation of illicit drug shipments from the border area to interior drug markets. The Del Rio/Eagle Pass corridor is supported by U.S. Highways 57, 83, 90, and 227, which extend from the border to the interior of Texas. Interstate 35 is the primary transportation route leading from the border at Laredo; US 59 provides access to I-37, which connects Corpus Christi to San Antonio. U.S. Highways 77 and 281 are the principal transportation routes that traverse the Lower Rio Grande Valley.”
“Much of the violence can be attributed to the battle between the Gulf Cartel and The Alliance for control of lucrative smuggling routes in South Texas. Murders in Nuevo Laredo remained relatively stable from 2005 (182) to 2006 (178); however, the number of murders committed in 2005 was the highest in 10 years. Moreover, law enforcement officials in Laredo report 27 murders in 2005 and 24 in 2006. Although no single cause has been identified in most of these cases, officials believe that most were drug-related. The level of violence may increase as a result of the extradition of Osiel Cardenas-Guillen and renewed efforts by The Alliance to gain control of the lucrative Nuevo Laredo plaza.3 While much of the violence has been concentrated in Laredo/Nuevo Laredo, areas along the entire U.S.-Mexico border in South Texas have experienced drug-related crime and violence associated with this conflict, including areas throughout the Rio Grande Valley, particularly in Starr and Hidalgo Counties, where drug-related extortion, kidnappings, and homicides have been documented.
Drug-related border violence is also directed at law enforcement officers. Assaults against U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) agents and sheriffs’ deputies in the South Texas HIDTA border area have increased. Law enforcement officers in the region have been fired upon while patrolling areas along the Rio Grande River. Encounters with heavily armed drug traffickers are also common. Drug traffickers wearing military-style clothing and carrying military-grade weapons, including assault rifles, pose a serious threat to law enforcement officers along the border. Large caches of firearms, grenades, and improvised explosive devices used by drug traffickers have been seized along the border in the past year. Increased border security measures in South Texas, including the deployment of National Guard troops as part of Operation Jump Start4 and additional USBP resources, will most likely result in more assaults against law enforcement officers along the border.”
http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs22/22796/border.htm
2. I don’t remember the exact statistics but I recall border arrest rates of illegal aliens along our entire southern border started to rise noticeably about 1982. The “out of control border” gave rise to the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration legislation of that era, 1986 final passage and enactment.
So here we are 25 years later…right.
If any SST reader has stats for recent year border arrests along the entire southern border on an annual basis I would be most interested. In the early 1980s, we calculated roughly that for every one arrested say 3-5 made it through. I imagine that may still be a rough way to estimate the flow in. Measuring the flow back and forth is problematic. I recall very vaguely an annualized arrest rate of about 1 million, say 100,000 per month across the entire southern border. But my recollection may be quite faded after all these years.
Prior to the 1980s, we did not have a severe illegal alien problem with respect to Mexico (and Central America.) But economic issues and demographic issues drove the situation in Mexico. Also don’t forget the escalating violence/guerilla activity in Central American during the 1980s — Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua — which caused some folks to want to flee the violence and economic problems and come north, much of the time illegally.
Open borders and a general amnesty… I find that silly. Securing the border and controlling who enters the country should be a matter of national security. As Sidney Smith poins out, that should be the first step. I recommend that a U.S. Border Guard (USBG) be established along the lines of the USCG. Take a couple of divisions and carrier battle groups out of the DOD and use those resources to establish the USBG and beef up the USCG. Let ICE do their law enforcement functions, especially the workplace enforcement functions. I wouldn’t want border guard troops raiding poultry farms and McDonalds looking for illegal aliens. Of course, this is pure fantasy. It will never happen, but I wish it would.
Next, vigorously go after any business using illegal aliens. Let’s see heavy fines, perp walks and asset siezures. The business community (and us consumers) will then demand national IDs and a guest worker program. I doubt this will happen either, but I wish it would.
Rounding up illegal aliens and deporting them… don’t bother. Many will leave if the employment opportunities dry up. I truly have compassion for those who risk coming here to provide a better life for their families. Working towards an effective guest worker program would be the most compassionate thing to do. However, like those who choose civil disobedience, they have to be willing to take thier chances under current laws.
Adam,
We had a good Secretary of State here in KS, but he wasn’t going to run again and then resigned. I will do all I can to make sure we don’t get Kobach. But there is 400 miles to the west of me that might like the guy. I’ve never understood western Kansas. They don’t like Sunday liquor sales and gambling. I’m not sure how they feel about illegals.
It’s the market, pure and simple. If there were no market of jobs to be filled by border crossers, they wouldn’t come. So if you want to control the flow eliminate those job opennings for ilegales. Then deal with any residual problems. If one starts there then many of the other problems will be mare amenable to solution. It might even cut our US unemployment rate.
“There is no reason that a legal ‘guest worker’ program can not be worked out that would provide the labor and protect all involved.” PL
That won’t happen because it would have to pass the U.S. Congress. The people who favor the AZ law are not interested in comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level.
It’s much easier to demagogue the issue from both sides of the aisle. The Republicans get to look like tough law and order types and the Democrats get to sign up more Latino voters for future elections. There is
no political will to do anyting reasonable or workable.
Col Lang, I agree with you I don’t think that citizenship should be granted just because a child is born here, I believe 1 or more parents should be legal citizens. If that were the case there would be no problem in allowing children to return to country of origen with their parents. As it is now the children are taken into custody if their parents are sent back and if there are no relatives that are legal the children can be placed in foster care or adopted, which the state pays for.
I am not being hard hearted either. I’m just describing how it is.
Tyler, I respect your postings about conditions on the border, because you live there, and I don’t. However, it seems like you’re not giving others that same respect, by posting non-facts; it is the MLB Players Union that wants to boycott the All-Star Game. Your other cryptic remark about San Francisco indicates to me that perhaps your information is second-hand, from less than reliable sources. Also, what is relevant about what a Puerto Rican and a Columbian think about US immigration policy? Should we care because they are celebrities?
To the point at hand, yes, it is obvious that a real solution needs to be hammered out, however, the problem is political, and the simplistic fixes are practically infeasible; how long was the Maginot Line, how much time and money did the French spend planning it, and where did the threat ultimately materialize?
I think Adam has made a very good point–while this is a genuinely tough issue, how many of its proponents are acting in bad faith, and demagoguing the issue? There is a pretty big overlap between legitimate illegal immigrant concerns, and wacko birtherism. Would you agree that illegal immigration has very little to do with ‘We speak English here?’ To me, a successful immigration reform movement needs to decouple itself from the true believers who are rallying around that last phrase.
Count me as cynical, because, as serious a problem as it is, it’s just a political football, and everybody wants to score a touchdown these days, but nobody wants to block and tackle for the team.
lina
And who is not “demagoguing” the issue? pl
Clifford,
I will look around and see if I can’t find those stats that you asked for. I believe Tucson Sector accounts for over half of all apprehensions in the Border Patrol. This sort of flies in the face of those who claim Operation:Gatekeeper was a failure. More fences and more agents apparently do put a dent in illegal immigration.
Adam, Roy G,
I will post something tomorrow or so. Sleep has been lacking and my focus isn’t what it should be. Watch this space!
Twisted,
1. There was an amnesty granted in the Simpson-Mazzoli Bill in 1986 and it affected several million illegal aliens then present in the US. It was argued at the time that this would be a single one-time only amnesty never to happen again. Opponents argued that it would establish a precedent for more such amnesty legislation in the future and would reward those who broke our laws.
During the floor fight over the bill in the US Senate, an amendment was offered to strip the amnesty provision out. It garned only about 20 votes as I recall. I was the one who drafted that amendment, among others which were introduced. Those procedings are of course recorded in the Congressional Record.
2. This is from a pro-amnesty website today:
” The proposed immigration amnesty would benefit the 12 to 20 million undocumented aliens (illegal immigrants) currently living in the United States. An amnesty for illegal aliens forgives their acts of illegal immigration and implicitly forgives other related illegal acts such as driving and working with false documents. The result of an amnesty is that large numbers of foreigners who illegally gained entry into the United States are rewarded with legal status (Green Card) for breaking immigration laws.
The United States has granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants through different amnesty and laws. Before the first amnesty in 1986, amnesty was only given on a case by cases basis. Amnesty was never given to a large group of individuals. The first (and supposedly one-time only) amnesty in 1986 gave about 2.8 million illegal immigrations the opportunity to change their status through the Immigration.”
http://www.usamnesty.org/
3. You might wish to consider the “Aztlan” movement:
“The concept of Aztlán as the place of origin of the pre-Columbian Mexican civilization has become a symbol for various Mexican nationalist and indigenous movements.
The name Aztlán was first taken up by a group of Chicano independence activists led by Oscar Zeta Acosta during the Chicano movement of the 1960s and 1970s. They used the name Aztlán to refer to the lands of Northern Mexico that were annexed by the United States as a result of the Mexican-American War. Combined with the claim of some historical linguists and anthropologists that the original homeland of the Aztecan peoples was located in the southwestern United States, Aztlán, in this sense, became a symbol for mestizo activists who believe they have a legal and primordial right to the land. In order to exercise this right, some members of the Chicano movement propose that a new nation be created, a Republica del Norte.[7]
Groups who have used the name Aztlán in this manner include Plan Espiritual de Aztlán, MEChA (Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán, “Chicano Student Movement of Aztlán”), and the Nation of Aztlán (NOA).
Many in the Chicano movement attribute poet Alurista for popularizing the term Aztlán in a poem presented during the Chicano Youth Liberation Conference in Denver, Colorado, in March 1969.[8]
Despite this, the idea of an Aztlan is opposed by the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic-American civil rights organization. The group has also stated that pro-Aztlan advocacy is outside the political mainstream of the modern Chicano movement.[9]”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztl%C3%A1n
From an anti-amnesty website:
“Under the euphuism ‘Hispanic Homeland’ and ‘Nation of Aztlan,’ activists from numerous organizations including Mexican American Legal Defense and La Raza (The Race) activists are attempting to annex large portions of SW United States to Mexico. “Republica del Norte,” the Republic of the North, which would include the present U.S. states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, plus southern Colorado, along with several current Mexican states, is “an inevitability” says Charles Truxillo, professor, University of New Mexico. He further states the new “Hispanic Homeland” should be brought into being “by any means necessary.”
The Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA), and the National Immigration Forum (NIF) whose names imply grassroots organizations reflecting the will of American Hispanics, do not represent mainstream American Hispanic opinion. Rather, they speak only in their own best interests, favoring the mass immigration that gives them more constituents they can then profess to represent. Polls show that Hispanic-Americans, like all Americans, support stronger enforcement of our immigration laws.
A ‘Hispanic Homeland’ could be written off as the work of extremists were it not for wide-spread support by Mexicans. A June 2002 Zogby poll of Mexicans found that a substantial majority of Mexican citizens believe that southwestern America is rightfully the territory of Mexico and that Mexicans do not need the permission of the U.S. to enter. The poll, a people search of appropriate persons, found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, “The territory of the United States’ southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico.” Zogby said 28 percent disagreed, while another 14 percent said they weren’t sure.”
http://www.illegalaliens.us/aztlan.htm
14 th Amendment of the US Constitution:
“ Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Short of amending the Constitution, the children of illegals born in the US are US Citizens…
I regret, Sir, that I must still continue to disagree on this matter. I do not believe that we lack control of our own borders to any greater extent than we want to. By the same logic, it can be said that the US does not control its own territory because every single person with a driver’s license exceeds the speed limit and therefore breaks the law. These people jumping the border are not an invasion. They are coming here to do my yard work.
BR
Sophistic nonsense. If being a scofflaw amuses you, so be it. pl
DQ
Yes. Amend the constitution. pl
Unless we/they are willing to impose mandatory jail sentences on the owners (not managers) of businesses who hire illegals, we/they are not serious about curbing illegal immigration. Everything else (fences, changing the 14th amendment, etc.) is just hot air. And there is zero political will to lock up the owners of golf courses, construction companies, agribusinesses, you-name-it. Why? Because they are the core of the Republican Party. And the Democrats get a win/win every time they register a new voter with a Spanish surname.
Tyler,
This would be great! Particularly great would be a data set of annualized arrests from say 1980 to the present. I have not looked at the immigration issue since the 1980s except for SST blog.
But at that time, myself and other US Senate staffers I worked with were in touch with Border Patrol and a range of law enforcement and other agencies and departments trying to get a handle on the situation.
I recall examing arrest data which I had requested for the early 1980s. We had it sector by sector, monthly, and then annualized as I recall. Using this data, we could see a real jump in the numbers from about 1982.
This jump coincided with the disintegration of the Mexican economy unleashed by Echevarria’s socialist policies and also the then fast rising birth rate/demographic trend.
I was assigned to the legislation because I had a national security type background. Most staffers handling the issue were either lawyers (I know…) if more senior, or young twenty-something college grad staffers doing domestic and social issues.
Simpson was an arrogant whore in my view and 25 years has not changed that view. Rather it has confirmed it. As a matter of fact, what we opponents of the watered down and deeply flawed Simpson-Mazzoli legislation argued (and what is in the Congressional Record as the historical record to show it) has essentially come to pass…uncontrolled border, massive illegal migration to the US involving many millions, major demographic shift in the US, major related narcotics, crime and violence issues in the US and so on.
We went through ALL OF THIS in debate in 1986. There is NOTHING new in the current situation. Just examine the Congressional Record of that era.
When, in the 1980s, the Senate had searching hearings on the narcotics issue, we were accused of “Mexico bashing.” Of course, the intell we were aware of but couldn’t publicly reveal indicated a large number of Mexican officials and politicians were themselves involved in the drug trade. This included governors of states. Some of this I think did come out in open session hearings rather than in Executive Session. I believe I recall Customs Commissioner von Raab testified and publicly named some names, or gave indications, of high Mexican officials involved in the drug trade.
Basically, in the 1980s the “liberal-left” “politically correct” crowd dominated the debates on immigration and counternarcotics. OK, fine that was the politics here and that is our system. But then examine closely the history of the last 3 decades on these two issues and their impact in the US. Have we as a nation learned anything? Any hard lessons? Frankly, I don’t think so as I haven’t seem much evidence to this effect.
I am sorry Mexico is becoming a lawless failed state. I like Mexico, its people, culture, arts, music, architecture and so on. It is a fascinating country, beautiful, wealthy, and progressive in many ways. the fact is that the US and Mexico enjoyed excellent relations during and after WWII, for example. It was only in the 1980s when tensions arose from the illegal immigration and narcotics issues.
I speak Spanish (and Portuguese) and have traveled widely in Mexico and in South America. I look forward to some more travel in Mexico and I strongly support more cooperation between the US and Mexican governments to deal with our common challenges as “Good Neighbors.”
Both our Presidents have their hands full with these contentious issues and I would like to see President Obama work even more closely with our Mexican friends to promote not only border security but also economic progress in both countries. There are many projects we could jointly do ranging from major energy projects to large scale water projects and so forth.
2. The issue of illegals hopping across the border to drop babies so as to obtain citizenship for them was raised in the Simpson-Mazzoli debates back in the 1980s. Also the issue of whether illegal aliens should have access to public education and to public health in the US despite their being illegals.
As I recall, the Supreme Court’s perspective was that because Congress had not specifically legislated on certain areas, the court defaulted to the 14th and etc. Thus, if Congress would specifically legislate in some of these “grey areas” the Supreme Court could uphold such more restrictive legislation.
Perhaps our SST lawyers could help on this one.
Adam,
Thanks for the enlightening info on Korbach. Maybe it’s time to bring Lou Dobbs back so Kris Korbach can get some more airtime!
Open borders and legalizing all drugs are simply fantasies. They are good proposals to get an emotional response and stir things up.
We should face reality: racism is not going away. When that impulse is the driving force behind laws, you end up with democracies like Israel and South Africa. Do we need politicians and media that pander to emotions?
And if this AZ law is enforced during the November elections, who will benefit?
The Texas Department of Public Safety, bless its collective heart, publishes extensive yearly compilations of crime statistics:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/pages/crimestatistics.htm#2006
If you look at the latest one, there’s a chart on titled “Index Crimes in Texas 1994-2008” that shows how crimes of violence and theft varied over that span:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/crimereports/08/UCR-27.pdf#page=8
If I get inspired (don’t count on it), I’ll try to generate some numbers for the LRGV counties of Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr and Willacy.
Clifford Kiracofe,
I would be happy to see amnesty as a possible outcome of appearing before an immigration court, even a common outcome. I don’t like the idea of blanket amnesty any more than I like the idea of blanket deportation. And thank you for all the background information.
the 14th Amendment was passed in part as a response to the pre-Civil War SCOTUS decision DRED SCOTT vs. SANDFORD where it was held that a Negro though freeborn could not be a citizen of the United States.
Dred_Scott_v._Sandford from Wikipedia
B.R.,
This debate is in part between people like you who have illegals work for them and people like me who live in neighborhoods with a large number of illegals. According to the local paper 80% of the Hipanics are illegal in my neighborhood. When I moved into my house 16 years ago the Hispanic population started to increase here and the families used the local park, played soccer and played with their children. I smiled and they smiled back. Then I noticed drug dealing, public intoxication, public urination and all types of bad behavior crowding out the gentle family atmosphere. They no longer smiled in return. My observations were confirmed by Hispanic Americans, one told me in no uncertain terms, “The Mexicans coming in now are scum.” His anger was understandable coming from a young man whose family had left a successful farm in Mexico when he was a child because a local gang was extorting money from his father and threatening the whole family. He did not feel it was safe to go to the police. His family came to the U.S., became legal citizens, and now sees the same corrupt gangs following him here twenty years later.
You don’t care what happens to my neighborhood and I don’t care how much you pay for yardwork.
Our border policy is mostly beneficial to our corporate elite and Mexican elite. Cheap labor for us and a social safety valve for them.
Would finding 67 people packed in a U-Haul (from Nogales newspaper link above) constitute reasonable suspicion? If they are Hispanic is that racial profiling? The Az law has been ammended by discarding “solely” and race can not be a determining factor for suspicion.
Col. Lang,
”
Nancy K
Hard hearted bastard that I am, I think we should stop granting citizenship to the children of illegal migrants.
How many countries give their citizenship as easily as we do?
American exceptionalism? Nonsense. pl
”
The principle of acquiring Citizenship “by blood or soil” pre dates the founding of the United States.
Any country that invalidates that principle is certain to create “Stateless persons” as well as leaving open the possibility of deliberately creating another underclass on the basis of birth.
The Supreme Court decided around 1993 that, as the babies had no say in the matter of where they were born, or where they were taken later, nor the immigration status of their parents, that it was only prudent, safe and equitable that the United States Of America claim them as it’s own.
To put it another way, under the Constitution, the power to govern resides with the people. It was agreed by the Supreme Court that the idea of the Government arbitrarily making laws about who was, and was not, a citizen over and above what was written in the Constitution was self referential and absurd.
It is a little known fact that there are countless children with one American parent around the world who grew up being told that they had no claim to American citizenship. It is not publicised, but since 1994 a simple telephone call to their nearest American Embassy will change that.
walrus
Does Australia grant Australian citizenship at birth to illegals who happen to be on australian soil at the time of birth?
Damned few countries in Europe do so. pl
Are there any statistics of how many people in the US are citizens by virtue of being born of illegal alien mothers in the US? A longitudinal look (aka time series) would be more interesting.
I’d think a first cut could be gleaned from birth records in border counties, but have no notion how easy it is to obtain such.
Col. Lang:
“Does Australia grant Australian citizenship at birth to illegals who happen to be on australian soil at the time of birth?
Damned few countries in Europe do so. pl ”
The children automatically get Australian citizenship if they remain here until their Tenth birthday.
Abandoned babies or children get it immediately and automatically.
walrus
Nevertheless, i think that you do not have the same kind of problem that we do. pl
Walrus
On reflection that seems a reasonable compromise.
As things are now in the US, the automatic citizenship given to those born here i acting as a lure, because once a member of a family is born here, reunification of the family sets in as a legal tactic. pl
Dr. Silverman
Just to complicate matters…
In 2007, a nephew was a junior in h.s. in Dalton Ga. One of his football teammates was a much liked black kid, Andre Johnson, who had everything going for him. Great parents. Good student.
One late spring day, after going swimming with some friends, this black kid was standing on a street corner outside a convenience store. A Hispanic gang member pulled out a handgun and shot Johnson in the chest. Prior to the murder, they had had no prior contact. Johnson had absolutely nothing to do with gangs.
The people of Dalton were simply devastated by this senseless tragedy. It actually may help if urban progressives read about a genuine outpouring of grief from the hinterlands — a true example of racial transcendence during a time of suffering.
http://tinyurl.com/272a9mc
The murderer was not a US citizen.
http://tinyurl.com/27jnoc9
This kind of tragedy is not an uncommon occurrence.
Proximate cause is a strange phenomena. But do you believe that the USG carries any of the burden for this young man’s death? Can you blame people who have suffered if they say something has to be done?
And it should be noted that after the murder of Johnson, his parents appealed for peace in “the potentially divisive situation”. Dalton has a large Hispanic population. My brother in law employs many “legals” and says they are great people. There are many success stories involving Hispanics in Dalton. But I think it is a great tribute to Dalton GA that despite all the suffering they endured from the loss of Johnson, the people were able to heal and move on with their lives.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/13407369/detail.html
“the automatic citizenship given to those born here i acting as a lure, because once a member of a family is born here, reunification of the family sets in as a legal tactic.”
This line of reasoning was advanced to no avail in the Simpson-Mazzoli bill debates in the mid 1980s.
Basically, the US is willingly acting as a sponge for the mass migration of millions of illegal aliens from Mexico. This mass migration, as I have noted before, benefits the Mexican oligarchy as a “safety valve” to move unemplyment and demographic pressures out of Mexico and thus out of Mexican politics.
I am not sure that it has registered quite yet with the average American that we are talking about a migration of tens of millions since the early 1980s. Ten, twenty, perhaps thirty million are numbers which might be realistic.
This mass migration has produced and will produce permanent irreversible demographic change in our country the long range consequences of which are not clear at best.
The radical alteration of our demographic which is underway and will be quite clearly felt by 2050 according to demographers is significant.
Personally, I will be quite dead by then. But I do wonder if our present Constitutional order can survive. It seems to me it won’t and that this republic will become more politically like those south of the border. Last couple of centuries have been pretty rough and tumble down there…
Here is some background from 2007 on the Arizona situation and the federal response.
“The violence associated with the problem of migration and narcotics … has reached epidemic proportions,” Mr. Dupnik told reporters on March 30. “If we had the money for the kinds of resources that we need, we could make a huge impact on border violence and crime.”
As Congress debates a comprehensive immigration program that many say is the only way to deal with the smuggling problems and the violence that it entails, Dupnik’s remarks show that those law-enforcement officers and agencies on the front lines are beginning to speak out, unite, and search for their own solutions.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), for instance, recently sent a new special agent to lead Arizona’s efforts.
“ICE is taking the lead in trying to consolidate the disparate and disjointed efforts – at least on the human smuggling side,” says Alonzo Peña, special agent in charge of ICE for Arizona. “One of the initiatives I’m bringing forward with our state, local, and other federal partners is a system to better track and coordinate investigations and intelligence related to immigration in the state of Arizona.”
Upon arrival in Phoenix last October, Mr. Peña was confronted with not only combating the highly sophisticated criminal organizations that smuggle more drugs and aliens into Arizona than any other state, but with building workable coalitions with local, state, and other federal law enforcement agencies…”
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0425/p02s01-ussc.html
Here is an item on kidnapping related to Arizona:
“The case illustrates how a terrifyingly common crime in Latin America has moved across the border into the United States: Criminals and their family members are being kidnapped by fellow criminals and held for six-figure ransoms.
The abductions are occurring in the Phoenix area at the rate of practically one per day, and police suspect they have led to killings in which bound and bullet-riddled bodies have been found dumped in the desert.
The kidnap victims are typically drug or immigrant-smugglers, who are seen as inviting targets because they have a lot of money, they can raise large sums of cash on short notice, and they are unlikely to go to the police, for fear their own shady dealings will come to light.
“We have never had a victim that we have investigated that has been as clean as the new driven snow,” said Sgt. Phil Roberts, who investigates the kidnappings. “There has always been some type of criminal element to it. Either they are criminals, drug dealers or human smugglers — or a close family member is.”
The kidnappers themselves are fellow traffickers who are doing it for the money or to punish their rivals.
Rise in violence, kidnappings
Phoenix had more than 340 such kidnappings reported last year, but police said the real number is much higher because many cases go unreported.”…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22614102/
Newsweek in 2009:
“”The tactics are moving north,” says assistant police chief Andy Anderson. “We don’t have the violence they have in Mexico yet—the killing of police officers and the beheadings—but in terms of kidnappings and home invasions, it has come.”
That raises an unnerving prospect: that the turmoil in Mexico—where drug violence claimed more than 6,000 lives last year—is finally seeping across the border. According to a December report by the Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center, Mexican drug-trafficking organizations have established a presence in 230 U.S. cities, including such remote places as Anchorage, Alaska, and Sheboygan, Wis. The issue is preoccupying American officials. “This is getting the highest level of attention,” including the president’s, says Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. She tells NEWSWEEK that the administration is dispatching additional Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel to the border, and it’s reviewing requests from the governors of Arizona and Texas for help from National Guard troops. Earlier this month, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, visited Mexico to discuss assistance and to share potentially relevant lessons that the United States has learned in Iraq and Afghanistan, says a senior Pentagon official familiar with details of the trip who wasn’t authorized to speak on the record.
All the attention has stoked public debate on a particularly fraught question—whether Mexico is a failing state….”
http://www.newsweek.com/id/189246
Is it any wonder Arizonans are concerned? I believe some polls show about 70 percent of Arizonans support this recent legislation…
Mr. Smith: I’m not trying to reduce the complexity, and I’m aware of the 2007 incident in Dalton, as well as many elsewhere. What I am asserting is that the bill just passed, and then quickly amended, in AZ isn’t going to do anything to deal with these issues. I think that what COL Lang has proposed would be an interesting place to start, as would several other very good policy proposals dealing with the issue. The AZ legislation, however, is just not good Law or policy. And the only thing worse than having either no Law on an issue that needs Law or Law that isn’t enforced is having bad Law.
Clifford,
Lo siento,
I forgot to look up the stats on the DHS intranet.
I really wish I could say I believe that if the current leadership of CBP was called up in front of Congress, they’d tell it how it is instead of throwing words around like “operational control” and “smart border technology”, but I think the latter will be the case. It will be another dog and pony show, like last time. Obama is no friend of the Border Patrol, that much is clear.
Former Chief Aguilar (Now Asst. Commissioner) is known as “Prince David” or “Chief Hollywood” or “The Bobble Head Doll” by many Agents for his nodding his head and saying “Everything is fine on the Southwest” during Bush II’s amnesty drive. Janet Napalitano is worse, since she seems to ignore the same complaints from her successor, Gov. Brewer, that she would issue daily.
On a different note, I don’t think mass deportations are impossible – it was done once, it can be done again. The passing of this law has made it so uncomfortable for illegals that they’re starting to leave the state and trying to Voluntary Return (VR).
I, for one, would be more than happy to do some serious interior city patrol.
On border violent crime:
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/05/02/20100502arizona-border-violence-mexico.html
Violence is not up on Arizona border
Mexico crime flares, but here, only flickers
by Dennis Wagner – May. 2, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic
NOGALES, Ariz. – Assistant Police Chief Roy Bermudez shakes his head and smiles when he hears politicians and pundits declaring that Mexican cartel violence is overrunning his Arizona border town.
“We have not, thank God, witnessed any spillover violence from Mexico,” Bermudez says emphatically. “You can look at the crime stats. I think Nogales, Arizona, is one of the safest places to live in all of America.”
FBI Uniform Crime Reports and statistics provided by police agencies, in fact, show that the crime rates in Nogales, Douglas, Yuma and other Arizona border towns have remained essentially flat for the past decade, even as drug-related violence has spiraled out of control on the other side of the international line. Statewide, rates of violent crime also are down.
[remainder of article snipped, but worth reading]
Today from McClatchy:
“More than three years after President Felipe Calderon ordered 50,000 soldiers into the fight against organized crime, Mexico’s military, some experts say, is mired in a conflict with no end in sight. Cartel gunmen now dare to harass military garrisons openly. And soldiers used to operating in rural areas now have to conduct security patrols in cities like this one, a metropolis of three million people…
By nearly all accounts, local and state police in much of Mexico are either too riddled with corruption or simply not up to the task of fighting traffickers, some of whom they consider sponsors and allies.
“The municipal and state police . . . carry out extortions, steal and kidnap, and when citizens complain nothing happens,” said Consuelo Morales Elizondo, a Roman Catholic nun who heads Citizens in Support of Human Rights, a local advocacy group. “Amid this scenario, people see the soldiers as their only hope.”
However, the army is facing difficulties. Despite a heavy presence on the periphery of this city, and across the surrounding state of Nuevo Leon, drug-related deaths have soared — rising from seven in January, to 12 in February, 62 in March and to 78 in April, the local El Norte newspaper said. Last month’s death toll was higher than the toll of all of 2009…
A former deputy national security adviser, Raul Benitez Manaut, said the urban deployments are putting new stresses on the traditionally opaque military hierarchy, and exposing shortcomings of the troops, many of whom have only a primary school education and enlisted more for a paycheck than for a vocation.
“A debate has to take place within the armed forces over their modernization and the military has to open itself up more to civilian society,” Benitez said.
In the past two months, cartel gunmen have grown bolder in confronting vulnerable military patrols with small arms fire, and even harassing garrisons with hand- and rocket-propelled grenade attacks or with brief ambushes. They’ve also commandeered tractor-trailers and SUVs to use in impromptu roadblocks against the military along Monterrey’s highways.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/05/03/93354/in-mexicos-drug-war-military-has.html
Optimax,
That is pretty much what I want..As I said earlier, I don’t really have many good answers to these questions. The solutions will have to come from people considerably smarter than I am. The only thing I wanted to do was to say I don’t believe that the presence of my gardener is an insult to the sovereignty of the US. These are a good and decent people, who take only what they earn. My life has been enriched by interacting with them, and only a cad would think I am speaking in a financial sense.
B.R.
I ask the Colonel’s indulgence for so many postings, but some seem relevant to the immigration story.
My local newspaper had a story this morning that definitely belongs in the Perversely Positive Consequences file:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/business/real_estate/Valleys_real_estate_soars_amid_violence.html
Valley’s real estate soars amid violence
By Lynn Brezosky – Express-News
Web Posted: 05/04/2010 12:00 CDT
MISSION — In what’s nationally been a down market for real estate, Rio Grande Valley agent Nester Montemayor has been doing, well, great. He sold 273 properties valued at $27 million in 2009, and things look even better this year.
The tax credit for first-time homebuyers hasn’t hurt, but Montemayor’s real boon has been the violence in northern Mexico.
“Really, it’s been happening for over a year now, but lately it seems like since things are getting worse in Mexico. We’ve been looking at at least a 50 percent increase,” he said. “There’s a lot more people moving to this side of the border from Mexico.”
An upper-crust exodus has made the Sharyland Plantation area of Mission virtually a suburb of Monterrey, Mexico — and a nice one, with golf courses, private pools and gated subdivisions.
People call agent Noe Lopez looking for several properties at a time. If not ready to pay cash for homes in the $180,000 to $300,000 range, they’re fine putting 50 percent or more down. And while wealthy Mexicans have for years been buying second homes in the Valley, they now are trying to relocate there altogether.
[ snip]
The Valley is just one hot spot.
Real estate agent Mariana Saldaña, a Mexican-born U.S. citizen based in Houston, has had Mexican clients send private aircraft to fly immigration attorneys to Mexico to consult.
“We have whole families moving over, five houses, six houses at a time,” she said. “They’re looking to move to San Antonio, Austin and Houston. … The border is too close. A lot of people want to get a little bit away.”
Saldaña says her agents run background checks on clients to ensure they have legitimate incomes.
“We don’t want any bad boys to slip through our fingers here,” she said. “We do our due diligence because we’re afraid also.”
[more snip]
B.R.,
I’ll ignore your cad remark because nothing in your original post implied a hiring policy different from you and Tyson Foods. I did not impugn the dignity of your gardener, as a matter of fact, some of those hard working Hispanics have bought houses in my neighborhood and are good neighbors–their kids are sometimes more polite than the White ones. As I mentioned previously we have our share of illegal bad apples I’d like to see deported. I don’t have all the answers either but do think living in a multicultural neighborhood gives me a more balanced view of the problem than an employer has. I’m not implying you have anything but a good relationship with your gardener but don’t find it a convincing argument for granting blanket amnesty. As I’ve said before I’d be happy with an immigration fix that seperates the wheat from the chaff.
Dr. Silverman
Thanks for the response. I am glad you are aware of the Johnson tragedy. I will note that the people of Dalton are not only aware of the tragedy but also experienced the Johnson tragedy and handled it heroically, imo.
The brilliant Dr. Robert Coles, author of the Children of Crisis series, is one of those in the academic world who appears to have the ability to empathize with those not like himself, and I always respected greatly his methodology. So I have wondered how he would have described this Dalton tragedy and others like it. My guess he would have recognized all the people involved and let them tell the story.
It is probably my fault, but I still am unable to determine whether or not you believe that the American people have a reasonable expectation that the USG should secure our nation’s internationally recognized borders. Worded differently, does the USG have a constitutional obligation (somewhat like a fiduciary duty) to keep the borders secure?
Let me try this approach.
I believe that Israel has the right to build a wall along the internationally recognized 1967 borders, in accordance with UN Resolution 242. In other words, Israelis have a reasonable expectation that the GOI will provide a secure border along those boundaries that, I stress, are internationally recognized.
Do you agree or disagree? If you agree, then is it reasonable for Americans to have the same expectation? If you disagree, then why?
At this point, there is no reason for me to ask you if you think Israel’s legal apparatus is race neutral or if any of the laws would survive the strict scrutiny judicial review in the land of E Pluribus Unum.
Again, I may be wrong, but much of your analysis overall at sst appears to be predicated upon the assumption that Israel is a “liberal democracy”. That aspect of your analytical approach is what I am struggling with, so I am simply looking for a coherence that I can comprehend and apply to your extremely fine work, including the complicated immigration problem in the US.
And again, one of my concerns is that the lack of US border security is causing an erosion of our 4th amendment guarantees.
Tyler,
Look forward to annualized tabulation 1980-present if possible.
Also, I notice so far in state and federal crime reporting on the border area that the general category “Hispanic” is used. But I have not yet found any distinctions made between “Hispanics” who are US citizens and Hispanics who are illegal aliens.
One would think local and state police records would indicate whether or not the criminal “Hispanic” for example was not a US citizen but rather an illegal alien? Are the stats being somewhat sanitized to muffle (for political or politically correct reasons or?) the illegal component in US border crime?
Do you have any insight into how such police records are kept and particularly as relates to illegal aliens arrested for criminal offenses other than immigration violation. The basic question would relate to how we are tracking the illegal alien component in our crime statistics and where this particular tracking would show up in various data bases. I haven’t looked at this issue for about 25 years now and I imagine record keeping and data collection and analysis have changed quite a bit over the years.
Halliburton subsidiary (Kellog Brown & Root) won $385 million contract in 2006 to build and run detention centers for undocumented aliens. If we were to “fix” the borders, the continuous flow of prisoners would cease.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/04/national/04halliburton.html
Registration may be nec to read NY Times article.
Some crime data from Arizona:
“Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has said about 20 percent of those in county jails are illegal immigrants. Former County Attorney Andrew Thomas estimated that illegal immigrants committed 36 percent of the kidnappings, 34 percent of the drug-related crimes and 17 percent of the violent crimes in the Valley in 2007.
“Nationally, illegal immigrants cost the U.S. health system $4 billion a year, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.”
phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2010/05/10/story5.html?b=1273464000%5E3313971