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.
The courts have ruled consistently that a state has no way to determine legality status. That it must be done by the Feds in Federal court.
As noted above, a person has the right to work until a federal court rules otherwise. It's in the states interest that they get there trained and legally.
That sounds very implausible.
E-Verify does that, and anyone is allowed to use that. But even if they did, that is a flawed ruling because it does not control immigration or naturalization. Its neither of those functions.
And your claim everyone has the right to work until a court rules otherwise is a complete fiction. Federal law already provides the process for establishing the right to work, and it has nothing to do with a federal court making a determination on the individual trying to work. Its a simple matter of providing the documentation required by law. If a person cannot provide that documentation then the law makes it illegal for an employer to hire that person.
E-Verify does that, and anyone is allowed to use that. But even if they did, that is a flawed ruling because it does not control immigration or naturalization. Its neither of those functions.
And your claim everyone has the right to work until a court rules otherwise is a complete fiction. Federal law already provides the process for establishing the right to work, and it has nothing to do with a federal court making a determination on the individual trying to work. Its a simple matter of providing the documentation required by law. If a person cannot provide that documentation then the law makes it illegal for an employer to hire that person.
Oddly the Supreme Court disagrees with you. Tell Trump to get Sessions to go after the employers or all you are doing is whining.
E-Verify does that, and anyone is allowed to use that. But even if they did, that is a flawed ruling because it does not control immigration or naturalization. Its neither of those functions.
And your claim everyone has the right to work until a court rules otherwise is a complete fiction. Federal law already provides the process for establishing the right to work, and it has nothing to do with a federal court making a determination on the individual trying to work. Its a simple matter of providing the documentation required by law. If a person cannot provide that documentation then the law makes it illegal for an employer to hire that person.
E-verify doesn't determine if a person is a citizen, do you even know how it works? All it does is check ID's submitted by an employee and ascertains if the social security number they provided to the employer was actually issued to the person claiming that number. And it's not always right. In 2012 a study found the false positive rate was 2% for immigrants with legal status.
There is no national database of citizens, ICE has to rely upon a number of databases and still can't readily identify people who they suspect are here without legal status.
That is not true. Arizona had always issued licenses to people who were awaiting deportation hearings and were allowed to work in the US under immigration law. What Brewer did was to order that a subset of those people, DACA recipients, were different and they could not be issued DLs. Courts agreed that the DACA deferment had the same legal rights as others awaiting action (it was just indefinitely deferred). Brewer's order was found discriminatory and unconstitutional.
DACA is over though. So the status is no longer deferred and there is no longer any such program...that's the difference. Brewer was correct.
E-verify doesn't determine if a person is a citizen, do you even know how it works? All it does is check ID's submitted by an employee and ascertains if the social security number they provided to the employer was actually issued to the person claiming that number. And it's not always right. In 2012 a study found the false positive rate was 2% for immigrants with legal status.
There is no national database of citizens, ICE has to rely upon a number of databases and still can't readily identify people who they suspect are here without legal status.
Social Security numbers are only issued to citizens and permanent residents and work-authorized temporarily present foreign nationals... So yes, its the same thing. All citizens have or are entitled to obtain a social security number.
DACA is over though. So the status is no longer deferred and there is no longer any such program...that's the difference. Brewer was correct.
They are renewing DACA recipients as we speak, though new applications are not being accepted. And if it were over, then Brewer's action would have no meaning as she only applied her order to DACA recipients. In any case it's dead and, frankly, in Arizona the anti-immigrant fervor faded with the recovery just as it came with the recession. E-verify worked really well in getting our kids back into traditional jobs in restaurants (we no longer have to speak Spanish to order at McDonalds) and similar jobs The illegals are in the trades where their labor still is not sufficient to keep up with the building boom.
Social Security numbers are only issued to citizens and permanent residents and work-authorized temporarily present foreign nationals... So yes, its the same thing. All citizens have or are entitled to obtain a social security number.
No one is required to give out their SSN, carry it with them or even have one. Some people have an ITIN number instead but that does not mean they are here illegally.
There is only one agency charged with investigating and determining the immigration status of a person, that is INS. Why are you arguing about it, though? You could google it and find out for yourself in about 90 seconds.
No one is required to give out their SSN, carry it with them or even have one. Some people have an ITIN number instead but that does not mean they are here illegally.
There is only one agency charged with investigating and determining the immigration status of a person, that is INS. Why are you arguing about it, though? You could google it and find out for yourself in about 90 seconds.
To get an ITIN you must not be eligible for a SSN. In other words a foreign national. Usually illegal, but not always.
It does not establish authorization for employment.
To get an ITIN you must not be eligible for a SSN. In other words a foreign national. Usually illegal, but not always.
It does not establish authorization for employment.
I never said it establishes authorization for employment, did I?
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.
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.
