U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-28-2013, 07:50 PM
 
20,611 posts, read 12,282,218 times
Reputation: 5895

Advertisements

A Nebraska town can prohibit landlords and employers from hiring or renting to illegal immigrants, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said an ordinance by the town of Fremont, Nebraska, does not discriminate against Latinos and is not contrary to federal immigration and housing laws.

Nebraska town can bar housing to illegal immigrants, court rules

Agreed. "ILLEGAL" alien ain't a race.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-28-2013, 08:53 PM
 
Location: texas
9,138 posts, read 6,482,842 times
Reputation: 2372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Packard fan View Post
A Nebraska town can prohibit landlords and employers from hiring or renting to illegal immigrants, a federal appeals court ruled on Friday.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said an ordinance by the town of Fremont, Nebraska, does not discriminate against Latinos and is not contrary to federal immigration and housing laws.

Nebraska town can bar housing to illegal immigrants, court rules

Agreed. "ILLEGAL" alien ain't a race.
Not so fast. The full 5th circut court ruled the opposite in the Farmer's Branch Texas case. The 8th circut may have to have the full court rule.

Quote:
The three-judge panel said in its ruling the ordinance does not have an "impermissible effect by removing a class of aliens from the city" or intrude on federal immigration and anti-harboring laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 12:42 AM
 
6,335 posts, read 4,255,415 times
Reputation: 1640
So you want to deputize landlords and turn them into immigration agents?

It's not the job of a landlord to check the status of tenants. What's next, making landlords drug test their tenants?

Nanny staters at work
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 02:31 PM
 
3,186 posts, read 5,452,602 times
Reputation: 1818
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper View Post
So you want to deputize landlords and turn them into immigration agents?

It's not the job of a landlord to check the status of tenants. What's next, making landlords drug test their tenants?

Nanny staters at work
It is a long time common practice for landlords to check the history of want to be renters. Things like credit scores and job history are checked so why would you object to also checking to SEE IF THEY ARE EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY? Only a pro illegal would worry about this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 02:37 PM
 
6,335 posts, read 4,255,415 times
Reputation: 1640
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestliner View Post
It is a long time common practice for landlords to check the history of want to be renters. Things like credit scores and job history are checked so why would you object to also checking to SEE IF THEY ARE EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY? Only a pro illegal would worry about this.
Because landlords didn't sign up to be immigration agents.

If a landlord wants to do that, that is up to him, free market, but only a nanny stater would force a landlord to do the governments job.

Big government rules!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 02:46 PM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,699,632 times
Reputation: 22158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper View Post
Because landlords didn't sign up to be immigration agents.

If a landlord wants to do that, that is up to him, free market, but only a nanny stater would force a landlord to do the governments job.

Big government rules!!!!!
A responsible landlord would require good background checks including credit checks on tenants. If a woman tenant gets raped because the landlord was bringing in criminal illegals, shouldn't the landlord be held liable?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 05:24 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,881,813 times
Reputation: 27519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper View Post
Because landlords didn't sign up to be immigration agents.

If a landlord wants to do that, that is up to him, free market, but only a nanny stater would force a landlord to do the governments job.

Big government rules!!!!!
They aren't deporting them. They are just saying "No, I won't rent to you".
Why aid and abet illegals ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 05:51 PM
 
20,611 posts, read 12,282,218 times
Reputation: 5895
Quote:
Originally Posted by crestliner View Post
It is a long time common practice for landlords to check the history of want to be renters. Things like credit scores and job history are checked so why would you object to also checking to SEE IF THEY ARE EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY? Only a pro illegal would worry about this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Draper View Post
Because landlords didn't sign up to be immigration agents.

If a landlord wants to do that, that is up to him, free market, but only a nanny stater would force a landlord to do the governments job.

Big government rules!!!!!
Uh; crestliner is right. Here in Bullhead; landlords do CRIMINAL BACKGROUND checks on possible renters so that'd cut out illegal aliens out the gate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 05:54 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post
Not so fast. The full 5th circut court ruled the opposite in the Farmer's Branch Texas case. The 8th circut may have to have the full court rule.

Losers will (at least, definitely SHOULD) go straight to SCOTUS and ask for a writ of certiorari, because that's where conflicting Circuit opinions ultimately go to be resolved. Unless the town has good reason to believe they will prevail en banc, in which case they should take it to the full Eighth Circuit since a victory there will be sufficient - no need to go to SCOTUS if you think you will prevail in your Circuit.

A favorable decision in your Circuit is controlling within your Circuit unless and until SCOTUS overturns it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2013, 06:00 PM
 
33,046 posts, read 20,714,185 times
Reputation: 8928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Packard fan View Post
Uh; crestliner is right. Here in Bullhead; landlords do CRIMINAL BACKGROUND checks on possible renters so that'd cut out illegal aliens out the gate.

Many illegals do not have any criminal history, so a criminal background check would not get them rejected by aa landlord, plus some illegals have multiple working IDs, and thus might have a criminal record under a false identity while using a second 'clean' identity to use with landlords.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top