California allows college aid to illegal immigrants

Before this bill there had to be very few illegal immigrants attending college. They (illiegal) do not currently qualify for federal student aid correct? I assume that this (their illegal status) would also disqualify them for other types of schoarship as well?

It will be interesting to see the stats from MD, TX, CA and other states who have passed Dream type acts on how many illegal immigrant children attend college.

 

There is an element to this issue that has far reaching effects. The Hispanic population is growing at a faster rate than the non-Hispanics. Granting the children of illegals (for this discussion, Hispanics) US citizenship status affords them the opportunity to completely change the political, and therefore the legal landscape of the United States. It is entirely conceivable where in the future we don't have any illegal immigration because of voters, or say…, activist judges.

Regardless of how we view the humanitarian aspects, the actual consequence of failing to act upon the actions of individuals with open defiance of a sovereign nation’s laws has to be considered both costly and dangerous. To those that advocate ignoring this issue or rubber stamping the actions, how would you feel about other laws being broken? For example, I want what you have, so I murder you, take your mansion, business, whatever, and then pass along these riches to my progeny. In effect, allowing the children of illegals to have access to the resources funded by US citizens; to vote, hold jobs, etc…is the same.

 

The law is the law. If we want an open border, then we should change the law to make everyone in the world an instant citizen of the US at whim. Of course that is ridiculous, so we draw the line at birth within our borders. Anything outside of that requires a formal process.

These kids are not to blame and should be deported immediately with their parents to the welcoming arms of their home countries. I would expect nothing less to happen to me if I were to illegally enter Canada and try to use their healthcare system and go to their schools. They would deport me and whoever I brought with me.

Take a look at what happens when you mistakenly hike into Iran. You end up in prison for 2 years.

 

Sorry... murder and robbery have nothing in common with illegally moving into another country, not even close, not legally and not philosophically, morally or otherwise.

 

1. Immediately deport those who are arrested for other crimes, which will take care of a large block of them. In spite of what they want you to believe, the "I just want to work" crowd commits crimes on a daily basis, some very serious, and currently, they need to practically send up a parachute flare to attract the attention of ICE if they haven't been previously deported or not shown for a deportation.

2. Implement Insta-Check for employment, and levy SEVERE fines on employers who knowingly employ illegal aliens, and those who rent housing to them, based on their own situation. Something like $5,000 for someone who rents the second part of their 2-family house to an illegal, $10,000 for a car wash owner who employs an illegal, and $1 million each for large corporations who employ illegals. Mandatory prison time for repeat offenders.

3. Eliminate the "anchor baby" provision. Unless your parents are either US citizens or are permanent residents of the US (green cards), then you're not an American citizen if you're born here. Any types of visas don't count.

4. Absolutely, positively no public assistance for illegals or their children. No welfare, no EBT cards, no Section 8 certificates, no in-state tuition....nothing. We should not reward those who break the law.

5. Unless it's a life-threatening emergency, no free medical treatment for illegals or their children. Upper respiratory infection? Sorry, better book a flight back to Brazil to deal with it. Broken hand? Better work on that trip back to Mexico for the surgery and cast. Torn Achilles tendon? Wrap it tight and tell the hospital in Dublin that you're on the way.

Illegal aliens are strangling this country. I've lost count of how many illegals I've arrested who had EBT cards (the new food stamps) and MassHealth (health insurance) cards on them, and living in Section 8 apartments. Who is paying for all of that?

Look in the mirror.

Enough is enough....the United States should not be the world's ATM machine.

 

Okay, if I were convicted of simple Assault & Battery (a misdemeanor), I still lose my job because it's a crime of violence, and my children are adversely impacted as the result of my voluntary act. I have absolutely, positively no sympathy for illegals who put their children into that situation because of their voluntary illegal actions.

During my rookie year, I arrested a guy for trafficking cocaine (2 kilos), and he fled the state after posting $25,000 bail, but he was caught in Virginia a couple of years ago, rendited, and is now serving 8-10 years;

After 21 years, fugitive arrested in drug case - Local News Updates - The Boston Globe

By all accounts, during his 21 years as a fugitive, he was a model citizen who operated a business, paid taxes, and raised a family. Should his previous illegal act (trafficking cocaine) be forgiven, simply because he managed to avoid capture for so long and his children would be negatively impacted by his imprisonment in Massachusetts?

Apply the same question to illegal aliens....should their previous illegal act (entering the country illegally) be forgiven, simply because they managed to avoid capture for a length of time and their children would be negatively impacted by their deportation?

I think you just proved my point.

The alternative is to send them back to the country from where they came. If their children are American citizens by birth but are minors, they go with them. Once they turn 18, the children can come back here on their own.

I've had it. I'm sick and tired of seeing for myself and reading news stories about illegal aliens flouting the laws of our country (often injuring or killing American citizens) and being a parasitic drain on our economy.

 

Again, you are equating a felony crime which has all the elements of a crime (intent, criminal mindset, etc.) with criminalizing children brought here by there parents. The children did (or do) not have the capacity to commit a crime (due to no criminal intent) therefore cannot be criminals. Draconian enforcement of a misdomeanor would not have the desired effect of eliminating illegal aliens anymore than the "war on drugs" has effectively eliminated illegal drugs (another humanitarian disaster). We need to fix the SYSTEM first and demand accountability from our federal government. Barring that states need to begin taking matters into their own hands ala Arizona...and each state has a right to determine how that needs to be done.

I do not disagree that the problem is out of control. I do not disagree that we import more crime through illegal aliens than we have "home grown" (as I said above). I do not disagree with your solution of deporting illegal criminals after a nice, comfy stay in our state pen...but where I draw the line is with kids born on this soil and children who were brought here by their parents. I know it's a cliche' to say "think of the children" but in this case they are every bit the victim that they are often portrayed as being by those on the left. There is a better answer... Since you gave me your plan, here's mine...feel free to poke holes in it.

1.) The Federal Government sets up an Ellis Island South…basically an expedited citizenship center with an explicit mission statement of turning around applications for citizenship within 1 week…as opposed to months or years. This same center should make use of federal courthouses as “branches” for services.
2.) Remove the legal industry from the process. The official U.S. immigration policy should fit on 1 page, be easy to understand and in clearly written English and by design take lawyers out of the equation as a necessity. Immigration lawyers can be like predators in many cases costing some people who work for minimum wage thousands of dollars to perform services they should be able to perform for themselves, we need to quit rewarding sand bagging and extortion. This will also have the added benefit of greatly reducing the amount of support and administrative overhead required for the “Ellis Island South”…thus cutting cost drastically when compared to what we have now.
3.) Applications can be approved or denied but never placed on hold. If denied the application should be enclosed with a clearly stated reason and if applicable any next steps the applicant can take.
4.) The whole project will be paid for by diverting funds from the current immigration services…or if necessary a special tax levied on foreign workers here in the United States. If we really want to get radical we can remove Social Security, Medicade and Medicare taxes from their liabilities since they are not entitled to these benefits without citizenship.








So what would the policy look like? All illegal aliens and new immigrants may become citizens if….
1.) They pass a criminal background check with a clean record of not more than a conviction for a class “A” misdemeanor in any state or jurisdiction not to include drug use or possession, gang activity, violent crime or driving under the influence.
2.) They have no history of mental illness.
3.) They have resided and can prove gainful employment for at least the last 5 years or currently have a history gainful employment from the same employer for at least 3 years.
a. An exception will be made for those who have at least 1 immediate family member who enlists in the armed forces.
i. Immediate family defined as husband, wife, father, mother, son, daughter, brother or sister only.
4.) They are not delinquent on any federal or state taxes.
5.) They can speak, read and write English at a 7th grade level or higher.
6.) They sign a document denouncing citizenship to any other nation and pledge allegiance to the United States.
7.) They agree to reside in the United States and not leave the country for at least a period of 5 years. (this is to prevent people from running over for a year or two of work then going back “home”).
8.) They are not currently “wanted” for criminal offenses within their country of origin.
a. Exceptions will be made in cases for political asylum.

Those who have entered the Unites States Illegally prior to this (legislation?) will be subject to a $1000 fine. Payment arraignments may be made so as to minimize the financial impact this would have.

Anyhow…that’s a start and I think it would fix the immigration issues we have, incentivize people to become citizens, pay their debts, submit to a background check, learn English and “do it right”. Then if you have those violating the law after making every avenue to follow it possible…do the draconian crack down thing.

This is just off the top of my head...you can't tell me that professionals whose job it is to enforce this stuff or pass legislation cannot do better than this...they can but choose not to. Democrats like the votes it promises and Republicans like the cheap labor and easy tax revenues for entitlement programs they know will never be cashed in.

 

Iran does not seem like the sort of example that the good old US of A should be following.

 

You didn't answer my question. Should the guy I arrested in 1988 have gotten a free pass because he managed to escape capture for so long and lived his life (apparently) legally for 21 years, and his imprisonment in Massachusetts would have a negative impact on his children?

It's either "yes" or "no".

In any case, you're comparing apples to moonrocks. Illegal aliens spend no time in prison, they are administratively help in an ICE lockup until they have their deportation hearing, or if they were previously ordered deported, they are held until deportation with no option of bail or release, which is considerably more harsh than being charged with most felonies.

Exactly what part about ILLEGAL do you not understand?

 

Funny thing is that not many follow our "example". Maybe, just maybe, something is backwards. Who ever said our examples are the right ones in every situation?

 

1.) Because the question was not a valid question. You are again equating a drug dealer (felon) with children brought into the country illegally (non-felons). If the felon were recaptured the felon would go to prison. If the children who were brought here illegally were "captured" THEY would go to jail. (I know it's technically a "detention center" but for all intents and purposes it is a jail). This is not a logical comparison. How about instead you compare a misdemeanor traffic offender who managed to evade arrest for 21 years for failure to yield at a stop sign? And in that case my answer is "no" the person should not go to jail for that even if the miscreant broke the law. There are some things that Americans are willing to tolerate from their police in enforcing the law…locking up kids is over that ill defined line. Think Elian Gonzalez which outraged folks across the country and in that case he had a biological parent waiting for him on the other side of the border.

2.) I think you’ll find I understand the term “illegal” fairly well and in this case we’re talking a crime of malum prohibitum (due to jacked up, ineffective and selectively enforced law) not mala in se (which arguably is what your drug dealer friend did although even that is debatable depending upon how you feel about drugs and victimization). On top of that argument there are varying levels of illegal from capital crimes to petty misdemeanors… Then of course there are those who would argue that they are in fact not “illegal” at all due to having no intent of breaking which I mentioned earlier.

Either way I get your point…but all laws have a lifecycle and I think our immigration policies are about to reach the end of theirs. Those charged to enforce these laws either cannot or will not. Those who pass the laws refuse to revise them. Those subject to these laws are choosing to ignore them.

There are other laws that also have reached the end of their lifecycle, are ignored or unenforced yet are still criminal acts with severe consequences. For example in San Antonio, Texas cattle thieves may be hanged on the spot (which has as much bearing on illegal aliens as a coke dealer who evaded arrest for 21 years).

In the meantime you’re a cop, feel free to bust any and every illegal alien you come across, you have the authority, exercise it to the extent your career can handle it. Just remember when it comes to slapping the cuffs on kids, you might get the odd look or sensationalized report on it.

 

Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors and immigrants are:

in the country legally;
have the means to sustain themselves economically;
not destined to be burdens on society;
of economic and social benefit to society;
of good character and have no criminal records; and
contributors to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also ensures that:

immigration authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
foreign visitors do not violate their visa status;
foreign visitors are banned from interfering in the country's internal politics;
foreign visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
foreign visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
those who aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.

 

No, it's a valid question that tests your opinion about people evading the law for a length of time. That you refuse to answer it tells me all I need to know.

Anyway, once again, you haven't answered my question, and the reason is becoming obvious....it's because a truthful answer would be devastating to your argument.

I don't know what police academy that you allegedely went to that taught you that if you evade capture for long enough, you should get a Mulligan, but I'd like to slap each one of your instructors in the face, if that's what they actually taught you.

Anyway, I'll play along. If I arrest someone for OUI (drunk driving) in MA, it's a misdemeanor until the 3rd offense. So, if I arrest someone for 2nd offense OUI (traffic misdemeanor), and they manage to evade capture for 21 years on the default warrant, should they have the charges dismissed upon their arrest, simply because they evaded capture for so long?

I know you hate being painted into a logical corner , and will refuse to answer, but it's quite simple;

"Yes" or "No"?.

Nice try on the legal mumbo-jumbo....the question remains, do we or do we not enforce the laws of the United States in regards to illegal aliens entering the country ILLEGALLY?

Yeah, and in Massachusetts, I can still arrest people for sodomy (a felony), but I obviously don't, because consenting adults "commiting" sodomy behind closed doors is no one's business besides the consenting adults, and consenting adults commiting sodomy behind closed doors doesn't cost the United States and the various states billions and billions of dollars, as illegal criminal aliens do.

As a city police officer, I have absolutely, positively no authority whatsoever to enforce immigration law. If you were actually a police officer, you would know this. However, if I arrest someone for a violation of state law or city ordinances, their fingerprints are sent to the FBI database, and quite often, someone who I arrest for a misdemeanor (unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle for example) pops on an ICE warrant.

 

Bruce - you are obviously not working in a sanctuary city because in those cities, as you likely know, when a person is arrested it is illegal to ask for immigration status and submit that information to the feds. Most people don't know this and I am surprised about it.
When I travel abroad, I make sure that I have my passport on me at all times because I know that since I am not a citizen, I need to be able to show my stamped US passport to any police officer who requests it. It is not only the law of the land in most countries but it is common courtesy as a traveler in another nation.

 

Alright Bruce I’ll play ball.

Fine then…if I had a felon or escapee who avoided arrest for 21 years and I suddenly “found” the guy then of course I would arrest him. It is entirely up to the court as to what happens then. But then for a felony warrant as you already are well aware arrest is compulsory on the part of the officer, I would have no discretion to allow him to leave even were I so inclined.

Is this devastating to my argument that I would not arrest an illegal alien (misdemeanor) should I (A) discover they are illegal and (B) even maintain the right to? I think not because the arrest is neither compulsory nor is being an illegal the same as having an active warrant or wanted status nor is it a felony or otherwise pose a general danger to society.

Actually that would be FLETC as I was Federal and I’d like to point out that cops to not give “Mulligans” but do use discretion in enforcing the law and again…evading arrest on an active warrant or being classified as “wanted” is not the same as being here illegally and you darn well know that or otherwise you WOULD have the right to arrest an illegal alien on the spot…wouldn’t you? Or do they simply allow townies to let federal fugitives or those with federal warrants to walk away?

Again this would be up to a judge as to what happens since as you know already, the police maintain no authority to dismiss jack crap as they are not judge and jury (haven’t we discussed this before?). So in answer to your overly simplistic question if it were up to me “no” I would not arrest someone on a 20+ year old misdemeanor warrant if I have any discretion in the matter. However if I detain the person and the county wants to come pick them up then “yes” I would facilitate that in the spirit of cooperation. Satisfied?

That “legal mumbo-jumbo” is the basis of our criminal law in defining “illegality” which you asked if I even understood the term. I am simply demonstrating that the answer there is a simple “yes”. Since I know you like closed ended questions so much. But do not think for a second that the term “illegal” as Steve pointed out earlier, removes any thought from the equation.

So let me get this straight. You will allow “some” people to break the law because as you see it, it doesn’t hurt anything/anyone but you will not allow “others” to break the law because of your own, personal perceived economic impact of their actions? Wow.

Since I was a federal officer, the rules governing what action we took were probably different than you. We generally did not arrest misdemeanor offenders. In the case of federal officers you generally have protection, investigations and intelligence functions…not general policing functions. As you may know all federal agencies have narrowly defined and specific jurisdictions in which they operate which allows for much less discretion in enforcement or non-enforcement of law when compared to state, county and townie cops. You also may or may not know that federal law enforcement agencies typically do not operate their own jails…so as for how prisoners are processed through the jail, etc. it is entirely dependent upon their own policies how and when that is handled. Assuming you actually are a cop (like that credibility dig?) I’m sure you guys process your own prisoners…so what exactly do you do when you get an ICE warrant? Do they pick up all offenders? Do they selectively pick them up? Do you get a lot of cooperation up North because I’ll tell you, down here in the South; along the border…they’re almost always “busy”.

I do find it mildly irritating and darkly amusing however that local police are asked to enforce federal law (even if through redundant state legislation) in virtually every area with the exception of immigration…why do you suppose that is?

 

Anyhow to summarize my argument and wash my hands of this mess now that I’ve answered your questions…I espouse police discretion at every opportunity which as you know is not a popular argument in many legal circles, and the kind rhetoric I am always trying to battle is the “selective enforcement” argument. At least in your case the enforcement is not race based (I am assuming) but more that you have “pet peeve” criminal acts that you enforce (or would like to see enforced) and others that you do not, which to some legal/political minds is tantamount to dereliction of duty in arguments against non-enforcement…an opinion I of course do not share. But what I have been arguing from the beginning is that police should use discretion in the detainment or arrest of another person simply because they are here illegally, especially when the surrounding circumstances concern children.

You tried to back me into a “logical corner” by attempting to get me to contradict myself which I have not. In matters where I have discretion to arrest or not to arrest, the totality of circumstances and grievous nature of their crime(s) will dictate what I actually do (discretion). You argued that because they were “illegal” they should be arrested on the spot, then hit me with the sodomy thing above to demonstrate you use personal/professional discretion while seemingly argue against discretion in the arrest and detainment of illegal aliens regardless of their age, criminal conduct, etc. To you, the fact that they are here illegally is enough. Your perceived victimization of society warrants draconian enforcement. To me and apparently to the majority of America it does not. To me the law is just about as ineffective and dated as the sodomy law you mentioned and used for political purposes only. So my argument is consistent, discretion should be used in the enforcement of any law where discretion is allowable.

Now being as close to the border as I am I remain very in tune with what is going on. I am not more than an 8 hour drive from a certifiable Mexican hell that makes up some of our border towns, some of these places would make Iraq look like a day at the beach. I am not in favor of Mexican nationals coming to the U.S. waiving Mexican flags and protesting in our streets…even if I understand their frustration. Nor do I see it a feasible or advisable course of action to create a “criminal class” of people or see the value in deporting 12 million people with a border as porous and wide as ours…talk about expensive and ineffective. Nor would I wage a 1 man war on illegal aliens because of a perceived wrong I have of their action, assuming I even could it would probably be a bad career move.

To be fair, I’ve said it before in other threads, one of the key issues that lead me to leaving law enforcement altogether was this very debate. This is why I have taken so much time in this thread to be clear in my argument. In my case I wondered how we could be so serious in the War on Terror when we do not even know who is in our own country. It was all hypocrisy. I personally know people who have been killed or otherwise victimized by illegal aliens who should never have been here because they were not just illegal, but violent offenders, known gang members and most of the time, repeat offenders. We couldn’t get them deported if we bought the plane ticket ourselves and clogging up the system with college age kids who are not “criminals” does nobody any good. I did get to participate in a “gang” member roundup that was entirely gratifying, but then seeing the same people pop back up 24 months later just demonstrated how impotent our system really is and took the wind out of my sails. The issue is an extreme sore spot for many in my area but the time for rhetoric and extreme views has passed and we will never have an actual solution until we all can calm down and create something that actually works. The only thing that will work will be a humane solution that does not deny productive, good people from becoming American citizens if they so wish while simultaneously documenting every person on our side of the border (if for no other reason than counter terror measures). Only then will this issue be solved…until then its heated emotions, hot wind and political hay to no effect and altogether tiresome.

 

What is a Mulligan?