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.
Does that include the guy who goes to the 7-11 and picks up four hard working guys for a day of landscaping in his yard and doesn't bother to verify citizenship?
Why not?
If said guy knew, if caught, he was going to be imprisoned for 5 years, he might not recruit day labor.
The American people cannot have their cake and eat it too when it comes to unauthorized immigration.
We the people ( remember corporations are people, too) want all the benefits of cheap labor and then turn around and blame big bad government for the consequences.
Each of those 4 hardworking guys in your example, hired to do the dirty work, will go home that night and create 4 anchor babies. The moms will immediately become eligible for welfare benefits including prenatal care and delivery. Those kids will be eligible for SNAP benefits, school breakfast and lunch programs, education and healthcare. That day of cheap labor resulted in 18 years of government expenses for four children.
The horse left the barn decades ago. No political party is going to risk denying the people their right to cheap labor. No political party is going to seek amendments to the Constitution to create a permanent two- tiered class system. No way 38 states would ever buy into such amendments.
Sen. Mitch McConnell is going to introduce legislation that would be called Kate's law. Kate Steinle was the woman killed by a man that had been deported back to Mexico 5 times.
Kate's Law would mandate prison time for 5 years for those caught back in this country after being deported.
The Mitch McConnell website is taking signatures for the required petition.
If it passes Bill O'Reilly will take all the credit!
Their big money corporate donors wouldn't like it. They would stop filling the coffers of any politician who dared such a thing.
Yep. When Trump or any right winger comes out with a platform that states that every employer who hires illegals faces a mandatory prison term then I will believe they are serious about trying to stem the flow of immigrants into this country. Until then, they are simply blowing the dog whistle that never fails to excite a certain segment of the population, but they have no real intention of doing anything about it.
Pew Research is the recognized expert on US unauthorized immigration. They say unauthorized immigration from Mexico has been on the decline since 2008. Unauthorized immigration is increasing from Asia, some ME countries, the Carribean and Central America. With the exception of Central America, most are arriving via plane on tourist or student visas.
There are about 70 million inbound tourists to the U.S.each year. We are not going to put them all in ankle bracelets, are we?
Most who overstay their visa, seek and obtain employment.
For more than 100 years the U.S. has recruited and allowed agriculture workers and their families to work here. Anchor babies happen. That $3.99 watermelon at Walmart and/ or " Two Buck Chuck " at Trader Joes, has a hidden price tag that persists for 18 years, birthing, feeding, housing, healthcare and educating that anchor baby and foreign born sibs, too.
Exactly. End the supply of cheap labor and wages will increase.
Actually, it isn't. Cite the Constitutional amendment that allows for anchor baby birthright citizenship.
The Citizenship Clause within the 14th amendment, 1868, covers this.
Canada and the U.S. are the only two countries in the developed world that confer citizenship regardless of parental authority to be in the country.
I had not realized that so many herein were unaware of the 14th amendment:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The issue with the 14th is that it wasn't intended to offer citizenship to anyone but Blacks. The SCOTUS just ruled on the benefits of the ACA and Roberts made it clear the intent of the legislators or law was as important as the wording. Here's what congress was saying then:
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."
But keep in mind that inmate population is already at all-time highs and prison capacity is desperately strained in many states, including here in California where authorities have been under Federal orders to ease overcrowding. And housing that many illegals is going to be a MASSIVE cost to taxpayers, so...are you ready to pony up more from your wallet and add to the deficit to make this happen? We'll need to built a lot more prison capacity, get people to manage it, and then cover the costs of housing all the inmates for years.
Not saying illegals should be allowed to cross the border with impunity, but...just that there is a real cost to everything.
I would suggest that this be left for people who are more repeat offenders than just anyone who is here illegally. The whole benefit of deportation and then finding effective ways to keep them out is that you don't have to keep paying for them; if they're all your prisoners, you're footing the bill.
I don't think they're liable for murder. But sanctuary cities are contrary to federal law as interpreted ever since the 1840s, and they could be subject to charges for contempt of court, obstruction of justice, and RICO.
AFAIK he had no violent past. Is a city liable for the actions of all homeless people with drug arrests if they turn violent?
Has any city, police department, or councilman been succussfully charged or convicted because a felon "was loose and should have been behind bars"?
And he was deported 5 times, which means he didn't exactly get any sanctuary. Dumb thread, but let's be honest, what threads in the Politics forum are not dumb?
I would also like to point out a pretty inconvenient truth to the Trump lovers... Crime has been dropping in all states and pretty much every city in the United States for a good 20-30 years, the exact same time that illegal immigration has reached record or near record levels and in which the overall illegal population continued to climb. How do you reconcile these two facts if you believe that illegals are themselves mostly, if not completely, violent criminals? There would be no logical way that crime rates would fall as much as they have if that were true.
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.
