Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
likwid

So is Arizona going to take the next step?

Rate this topic

36 posts in this topic

View PostOnly enforce it on companies that give money to the Democrat party.

 

You employ illegals don't you?

 

God bless the party of "no" or should we change it to "do as we say, not as we do"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hope they do. Fines for knowingly employing an 'Illegal' should be severe.

 

But, if you go after 'employers', you must also go after 'Sanctuary Cities'. If a Government Entity is not required to 'enforce', and/or abide/comply by State and Federal Immigration Laws, how can you require private entities to do the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostI would hope they do. Fines for knowingly employing an 'Illegal' should be severe.

 

But, if you go after 'employers', you must also go after 'Sanctuary Cities'. If a Government Entity is not required to 'enforce', and/or abide/comply by State and Federal Immigration Laws, how can you require private entities to do the same?

 

Lets prosecute the Fed, state and local government entities that give out taxpayer monies to foreigners that are in the usa illegally FIRST.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostLets prosecute the Fed, state and local government entities that give out taxpayer monies to foreigners that are in the usa illegally FIRST.

 

Rules for one are rules for all.

 

 

Notice the parts in red below. I think this 'covers' Sanctuary Cities as well as Employers.....

 

 

Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

 

 

"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an illegal alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each illegal alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."

 

 

Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):

 

 

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:

 

 

* assists an illegal alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or

 

* encourages that illegal alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or

 

* knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

 

 

Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime. Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit) immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for treble damages and injunctive relief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The laws are in place, but seldom used by the Federal Government. With the passage of the new law that basically lets Arizona peace officers enforce the federal laws on the books, I believe Arizona is ready, willing and able to enforce the federal laws designed to punish employers of illegal aliens.

 

In 2005, Arizona Congressman tried to implement a law that would assess a fine on an employer of $50,000 per each illegal employee.

 

The liberal lackeys who are whining and barfing up their objections against the new AZ law stimied its passage. Guess who was the Govenor of AZ in 2005.

 

The liberal, progressive democrat lady who know refers to the islamic terrorist attacks of 9-11 and all other attacks on US citizens as "Man made incitents!!

 

Yep, that's our Sec. of Homeland Security appointed by President Obama.

 

 

h_section.gif

 

Billy House and Susan Carroll

The Arizona Republic

Sept. 29, 2005 12:00 AM WASHINGTON - Rep. J.D. Hayworth, R-Ariz., plans to introduce today a sweeping immigration enforcement bill that would create a new national Social Security card, crack down on employers who hired undocumented workers and bring a moratorium on immigrant visas for Mexican citizens.

 

Although the provisions of the bill were well-received by some proponents of greater immigration control, they were widely assailed by immigration attorneys, advocates for undocumented immigrants and privacy watchdogs.

 

The Enforcement First Immigration Act of 2005 laces together in one package new and old proposals.

advertisementclear.gifOAS_AD('BoxAd')clear.gif

 

 

It represents what Hayworth and other U.S. House conservatives hope will be their signature core principles in any immigration reform bill agreed upon by Congress.

 

"The hope is that my model of enforcement will be a blueprint where the majority . . . can come together," Hayworth said of the 113-page bill he plans to detail today at a Capitol Hill news conference.

 

 

Increasing enforcement

 

Hayworth joins several other Arizonans in producing his own major legislation targeting immigration reform, a key issue for their state, which is the gateway for most of the illegal immigration into the United States.

 

Some provisions echoed a bill by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., that calls for 10,000 more Border Patrol agents, adds Customs and Border Protection officers at ports of entry and expands detention space for undocumented immigrants.

 

But Hayworth's bill, unlike other immigration legislation introduced this session, would reduce the number of visas available, particularly for Mexican citizens.

 

It includes provisions that historically have proved controversial, such as putting the military on the border, ending automatic citizenship for babies born on U.S. soil and authorizing an estimated 700,000 state and local law enforcement officers to enforce immigration law.

 

The proposed legislation also would make voting in a foreign election without approval from the secretary of State a felony.

 

Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors stricter immigration controls, said the bill is "the right approach because it focuses on enforcement first."

 

"I don't mean to be a mouthpiece for the bill, but it really does summarize the approach we need to take, which is to regain control of the border and then talk about whether we need an amnesty or guest-worker program," he said.

 

"I'd have to say Congressman Hayworth's bill is common sense. In fact, it's hard to believe there would be any objection to it at all."

 

But critics found plenty to fault in the legislation.

 

"I don't expect this is going to be taken particularly seriously on Capitol Hill," said Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum, a Washington, D.C.-based organization that pushes for more legal immigration. "The debate has moved far beyond where Representative Hayworth is."

 

Kelley charged that Hayworth's bill mistakenly tries to stop illegal immigration by restricting legal immigration. (Imagine that!)

 

"I think there's some enforcement provisions in here that might make sense, but they can't be absent an overall reform," she said.

 

"It guarantees our illegal immigration population will swell because it shuts off the narrow legal channels that now exist."

 

The bill will have strong backing from the anti-illegal immigration lobby and may have a chance given the "sentiment in the House," said Ira Mehlman, a Los Angeles-based spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which lobbies for reductions in immigration.

 

"These bills are always difficult, but I think the level of public discontent with mass immigration and the fact that it is now spread all across the country works in the favor of getting this support that it needs," he said.

 

 

Employer accountability

 

Mehlman said the bill addresses some of the major issues that fuel the growth of the undocumented population in the United States, now estimated at 10 million to 12 million people.

 

Hayworth's bill would dedicate thousands of agents and local law enforcement officers to identifying and deporting undocumented immigrants, while increasing the fines for employers who flouted the law.

 

Under Hayworth's bill, hiring one undocumented immigrant could result in a penalty of up to $50,000 and a jail term of up to one year.

 

"It actually puts some teeth into enforcement, which has been lacking for a long time," Mehlman said.

 

"It creates a verifiable means for employers to check if somebody is legal to hold a job, and if they fail to observe those procedures, there is a serious fine involved.

 

"On the other side of the equation, it sends the message to people that if you are caught . . . you will be sent home."

 

Lynn Marcus, director of the University of Arizona Immigration Law Clinic, said the proposed legislation is a "monster" with "many heads," alluding to the number of controversial provisions.

 

liqwid - Your Oh, so indignant comment on Arizona lacks even a pinhead of proof that the current administration in AZ doesn't wish to enforce laws against employers.

 

The same people who are attempting to stifle the Arizona Law were the ones who ranted against this proposal in 2005.

 

70% of Arizona citizens, including Hispanics support enforcement of the new law.

 

Go peddle your silly and uninformed insuations elsewhere.

 

The peope of Arizona are living with the flood and cost in treasure and crime that has come from illegals who have flooded into their state.

 

They have the right to defend their land and their families. bama and the democrats look at the illegals as votes for their socialist agenda.

 

Look at the national polls and see the damage the Dems are receiving from a more aware and interested America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostI would hope they do. Fines for knowingly employing an 'Illegal' should be severe.

 

But, if you go after 'employers', you must also go after 'Sanctuary Cities'. If a Government Entity is not required to 'enforce', and/or abide/comply by State and Federal Immigration Laws, how can you require private entities to do the same?

 

View PostLets prosecute the Fed, state and local government entities that give out taxpayer monies to foreigners that are in the usa illegally FIRST.

 

2 clear thinking individuals!

Very refreshing.

 

Never thought of it that way. The Fed can't fine just US Citizens who do wrong without applying the same criteria to themselves.

Roll the tanks into SF and other Sac Cities and drain the swamp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope they do and I have to ask this. But since when did "not knowing" become a reason the law shouldn't bite you in the ass? I was always told being unaware of a law or situation still puts you at full risk of the law. That should apply to business owners. If we start making exceptions where does that put us in persepctive of the freakin laws we have?

 

There's gonna be some broken eggs if we're ever gonna fix this illegal immigration problem.

 

I personally think the Dem's would be moving full steam ahead with Amnesty if they had the political power to do so. As it stands they don't........ The Repub's don't want this problem fixed either so in the end the status-quo is "just fine" with all partys in DC......

 

If there is any hope at all left it's on a state level. Good for Arizonaclapping.gif

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostI hope they do and I have to ask this. But since when did "not knowing" become a reason the law shouldn't bite you in the ass? I was always told being unaware of a law or situation still puts you at full risk of the law. That should apply to business owners. If we start making exceptions where does that put us in persepctive of the freakin laws we have?

 

Anyone who claims they didn't know they were illegal needs to be dragged out and hung. They know exactly who/what they're employing.

 

There's gonna be some broken eggs if we're ever gonna fix this illegal immigration problem.

 

I personally think the Dem's would be moving full steam ahead with Amnesty if they had the political power to do so. As it stands they don't........ The Repub's don't want this problem fixed either so in the end the status-quo is "just fine" with all partys in DC......

 

If there is any hope at all left it's on a state level. Good for Arizonaclapping.gif

 

John

 

Amnesty would be political suicide, still too many white people in this country. Despite the cries of various people here reading their Rush or whoever, it isn't going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View Post

Amnesty would be political suicide, still too many white people in this country. Despite the cries of various people here reading their Rush or whoever, it isn't going to happen.

 

You're right, I think the people will prevail and win this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Bush tried the Amnesty route with out securing the Borders first, I sent him a nasty gram and addressed it to Jorge Bush!

 

I have zero anomosity for Hispanics. But there are many Hispanics who have come to the US legally and have ID to prove it. Just like you and me. Drivers licences, military ID cards, social security cards that don't go "TILT" when the numbers are checked for verification.

 

Opening the border for the millions of poor people south of it who are being treated poorly by thier governments is BS. There are a great number of them in the Combat Units of the US Army and The US Marine Corps. Many who have chosen to defend America with their bodies and who can transition from Non-American serving in the US Armed Forces to US Citizen.

 

All of a sudden we have people ignoring the piss poor conditions they left and start waving Flags and start talking about Social justice and Revolution. These people are pissing on the legs of the American taxpayers who are providing them with shelter, education and a higher standard of living than they left in Central or South America.

 

Stop the flow north now. It isn't carrying workers to us, it is carrying drugs. The coyote's are charging $2,500 a head to bring people north. If they don't have the money they make mules of them.

 

Arizona is under seige! Who's side are you on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostAnyone who claims they didn't know they were illegal needs to be dragged out and hung. They know exactly who/what they're employing.

 

 

Amnesty would be political suicide, still too many white people in this country. Despite the cries of various people here reading their Rush or whoever, it isn't going to happen.

 

Really? For a small Employer, SSNVS is about the only 'Game in Town' that doesn't cost an 'Arm and a Leg'. All SSNVS will do is match the SSN to the name. It takes just a little effort to acquire a 'valid' name/SSN. You can rent one, buy one, or put in the 'time' to find your own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
View PostReally? For a small Employer, SSNVS is about the only 'Game in Town' that doesn't cost an 'Arm and a Leg'. All SSNVS will do is match the SSN to the name. It takes just a little effort to acquire a 'valid' name/SSN. You can rent one, buy one, or put in the 'time' to find your own.

 

Why are you such an apologist for those who employ illegals?

They're ILLEGAL.

They do not belong here.

And neither do their employers.

 

Pull a background check.

See what comes up.

 

Is Eduardo's name also Enrique? Jorge? Hayzoose? William?

Would you hire someone who has 3 names in the system and a possible record?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah if you think about employers are the key, no work = no illegals. Employers have played a major role in the problem and now its time to have them play a vital role in the solution.

  1. Employers should be punished for hiring illegals

  2. Employers should be monetarily rewarded for turning in illegals seeking work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.