Arizona's anti-imigration law...

[Baba gounj]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...02-23-01-24-25

PHOENIX (AP) — An Arizona Senate committee late Tuesday narrowly approved a sweeping bill that would target illegal immigrants in public housing, public benefits and the workplace.
The committee earlier Tuesday also approved a bill that would deny automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants in a measure designed to set up a possible U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue.
Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce, who authored Arizona’s controversial illegal immigration law last year that touched off a nationwide debate on whether states can enforce federal immigration laws, sponsored Tuesday’s more sweeping measure.
“If you’re in the country illegally, you don’t have a right to public benefits, period,” he said.

[Lue C Fur]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...02-23-01-24-25

PHOENIX (AP) — An Arizona Senate committee late Tuesday narrowly approved a sweeping bill that would target illegal immigrants in public housing, public benefits and the workplace.
The committee earlier Tuesday also approved a bill that would deny automatic citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants in a measure designed to set up a possible U.S. Supreme Court case on the issue.
Republican state Sen. Russell Pearce, who authored Arizona’s controversial illegal immigration law last year that touched off a nationwide debate on whether states can enforce federal immigration laws, sponsored Tuesday’s more sweeping measure.
“If you’re in the country illegally, you don’t have a right to public benefits, period,” he said.

Good job Russel Pearce!!!

Bill Highlights:

It also requires schools to collect information on the legal status of students and report them to law enforcement if their parents don't provide the necessary documents or the documents appear false.

The bill also makes it illegal for an illegal immigrant to drive in the state, providing for a 30-day minimum jail sentence and the seizure of their vehicles if they are convicted.

In housing, it requires public agencies to verify the immigration status of renters and to evict everyone living in a unit if one was found to be an illegal immigrant. For health care, the bill changes some of the document requirements for the state's Medicaid program.

The bill toughens requirements that employers check work eligibility of new hires, allowing for their business licenses to be suspended if they don't use the federal E-Verify system. Workers caught using a false identity to get a job would face mandatory six-month jail sentences.

[moreluck]

Texas is looking at their own solution....YAHOO !!!!.............

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...bers-congress/


I've always thought the CA. illegals should go to Pelosi's back yard. (Little Miss Sanctuary)

[Baba gounj]

75% of ILLEGALS Use Fraudulently Obtained SSNs

Time to protect American children from illegal alien identity theft

By Ronald Mortensen
Illegal alien driven, employment-related identity theft is destroying the good names and futures of literally millions of innocent American children, while current federal identity theft law and the IRS and Social Security Administration sit on the sidelines as the number of victims continues to grow.
According to the Social Security Administration, an estimated 75 percent of illegal aliens use fraudulently obtained Social Security numbers to pay payroll taxes. In Utah, employment related identity theft accounts for 16 percent of all reported identity theft according to the Federal Trade Commission.

[Baba gounj]

Texas border – ID theft hot spot

Identity theft: Texas border, Brooklyn among nation’s ID theft hot spots

By Isaac Wolf,
Scripps Howard News Service
WASHINGTON — Want to lessen your odds of becoming a victim of identity theft? Don’t move to Brownsville, Texas.
More specifically, stay out of the city’s ZIP code, 78521.
That ZIP code has the dubious distinction of generating the most identity theft complaints during the last half-decade, according to a Scripps Howard News Service analysis of more than 1.4 million reports made by consumers to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.
Residents from that ZIP code generated 1,513 complaints — far more than the 922 complaints from the second-place ZIP code, 90044, near Inglewood, Calif.
Another nearby Brownsville ZIP code, 78520, ranks 12th nationally with 813 consumer complaints. Also high on the list are ZIP codes in Texas towns near Brownsville, including Mission, Pharr and Weslaco.

[UPS Lifer]

Texas is looking at their own solution....YAHOO !!!!.............

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...bers-congress/


I've always thought the CA. illegals should go to Pelosi's back yard. (Little Miss Sanctuary)

I think SoCal (not LA) but the rest of it proceeding south should secede! One of our southern counties (Pima) is trying to secede because they don't like what Phoenix is doing! I say ... Good bye and don't let the door kick you in the arse.

[bbsam]

I'd say this law is destined to end up in the Supreme Court and go down in flames. Without a Constitutional ammendment I don't see how it get's around the very smple statement that all children born in the US are US citizens.

[Baba gounj]

I'd say this law is destined to end up in the Supreme Court and go down in flames. Without a Constitutional ammendment I don't see how it get's around the very smple statement that all children born in the US are US citizens.

In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthrig...al_intent.html

[trplnkl]

In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
"Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country."
The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was intended to exclude American-born persons from automatic citizenship whose allegiance to the United States was not complete. With illegal aliens who are unlawfully in the United States, their native country has a claim of allegiance on the child. Thus, the completeness of their allegiance to the United States is impaired, which therefore precludes automatic citizenship.
http://www.14thamendment.us/birthrig...al_intent.html

I agree with what Sen.Jacob Howard said andd do believe that was the intent of the amendment. I just have to ask him, posthumously, why wasn't that added to the amendment in the first place. We wouldn't be in the conundrum we are now if they had.

[bbsam]

I agree with what Sen.Jacob Howard said andd do believe that was the intent of the amendment. I just have to ask him, posthumously, why wasn't that added to the amendment in the first place. We wouldn't be in the conundrum we are now if they had.

But it wasn't and now we are and with a whole lot of case-law from that point on which may indeed point in the opposite direction.