JUSTICE 101

homerskid · Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:53 am Illegal Immigrants Looking for a Loophole.

It appears that illegal immigrants are looking for loopholes ,and are being scammed.

Buy your way into a tribe? Come on now...lol

homer

Tribes Offer Membership to Immigrants

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070817/D8R2VJ202.html

The Shadow · Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:10 pm

These tribes do not seem to be recognized. I just called my friend Eddy Two Rivers who is an Amerindian spokes man and he told be that recognition is neither easy nor is is arbitrary. The US government alone cannot simply recognize or not recognize a tribe on a whim. It is very long and difficult process. Often recognition is refused by the Amerindians themselves for various reasons before the feds even can act on it. However he did say this. If the tribe is a recognized entity and has a reservation the federal government cannot just walk in and arrest someone. This is also a complicated process. That being said, The feds usually get what they want.

homerskid · Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:37 am

When is illegal...not...illegal?

This could cause problems if upheld.

What was this Judge thinking?

Charlie

http://www.lashawnbarber.com/index.php

Being In the U.S. Illegally Isn’t Illegal?
The fools among us…

A three-judge panel of an appeals court in Kansas just held that an illegal alien’s “ongoing presence in the United States in and of itself is not a crime” unless the illegal alien reentered the country after a previous deportation. (Source)

Can you believe it? Entering the U.S. in violation of the law is illegal. Being in the U.S. in violation of the law may not be illegal. How and under what condition could that ever make sense? Isn’t it common sense that an illegal alien, by virtue of breaking the law, is a criminal? That’s why he’s called an illegal alien. His mere presence inside these borders makes him an outlaw.

But I’m jumping the border…I mean, the gun. The facts:

Some drug-dealing moron named Nicholas Martinez had his kid deliver drugs to an undercover cop (rotten luck!). He was arrested and charged with the sale of cocaine, possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, endangering a child, theft, and unlawful possession of an identification card. Under a plea agreement, he pled to possession and endangering a child.

Incredibly, the district court was going to give him probation — as was warranted under the sentencing guidelines — instead of throwing his sorry butt in jail. But there was a problem. The judge said (emphasis added):

Okay, . . . the problem that arises for me is to follow the guidelines here is because Mr. Martinez is illegally in the country and is in violation of the probation rules right from the start if I were to place him on probation. . . . [H]e . . . has to comply with all the conditions of the probation and he can’t do that because he’s in violation of the law not to violate any federal or state laws. And so for that reason, I am going to have a big problem following these guidelines, but is there any legal reason why I should not impose sentence at this time?

Because Martinez was in the country illegally, he already was breaking the law, which means the terms of probation already were violated, the district court correctly, in my opinion, reasoned. It departed from the guidelines and sentenced the drug-dealing criminal and criminal alien to eleven months in jail for the drug charge and a year for the child endangerment charge, to run concurrently.

Naturally, the drug-dealing illegal alien appealed. Among other things, he argued that his being an illegal alien was “not a substantial and compelling reason to deny him presumptive probation.”

The appeals court agreed. Here’s the opinion. This is the golden nugget that will be quoted far and wide in mainstream media and in the blogosphere (emphasis in original):

“While Congress has criminalized the illegal entry into this country, it has not made the continued presence of an illegal alien in the United States a crime unless the illegal alien has previously been deported and has again entered this country illegally. 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (2000) makes it a felony for an alien who has been deported to thereafter reenter the United States or at anytime thereafter be found in the United States.”

In other words, the judge suspended logic — that illegal aliens obviously are in the country illegally — because Congress wasn’t explicit, and threw out the sentence.

Martinez also argued that it’s not the state court’s function to enforce federal immigration law. True, but as the appeals court pointed out, the district court wasn’t enforcing immigration law by recognizing that the drug-dealing thug was an illegal alien. I hope George Bush reads this part:

“The fact that our national leaders, for political, policy, or budgetary reasons, have chosen to ignore violations of our immigration laws does not prevent our courts from considering whether a defendant is engaging in an ongoing violation of law in determining that defendant’s amenability to probation. The sentencing court should not be compelled to impose a plan of probation which, by its very nature, cannot be successfully completed.”

The case goes back to the lower court for resentencing. Who knows what will happen after that. The prosecutors had accepted Martinez’s plea, so I don’t see them appealing the case to the Kansas Supreme Court.

The confusion and illogical conclusions of this opinion are the direct result of our federal government abdicating its role as enforcer of immigration laws. Now, states and local governments have to contend with the everyday messes the feds left us with. Murdering and drug-dealing illegal aliens, who shouldn’t even be here, are free to roam the streets, juicing off law-abiding taxpayers in perpetuity.

Beth · Thu Aug 23, 2007 7:37 am

It looks like Tancredo is reccomending what I suggested in a previous post. Start filing lawsuits against the cities for damages caused by illegal aliens that are a direct result of sanctuary city policies. I saw an interview with him where he stated he is now informing victims and family members of victims of crimes committed by illegal aliens that they have the right to sue sanctuary cities for (I am assuming) gross negligence or failure to enforce federal law resulting in death or grave harm. Apparently he has consulted several lawyers and they believe these lawsuits will go through. Federal law trumps state and local law.

I knew these people had cases. Failure to enforce a law resulting in the death of a citizen is negligence. Example: Failure to enforce simple guidelines in foster care programs resulting in harm can open a state to lawsuits. So how is this any different? I don't want to just jump on this bandwagon, but I can't argue with this one. These crimes ARE 100% preventable.

homerskid · Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:08 pm

There was a lengthy discussion about that on Fox...it seems an ordinary citizen can not sue a city,or city government for making policy while in office.

The people at ICE.Homeland Security,and Congress, were not specific enough on illegal immigration to force cities to report illegals ARRESTED...only after being convicted.

Now in the case of the Newark teens who were executed in the schoolyard.

That Mayor and police force may be liable because this guy has a conviction or two on the books.

What worries me is what that Judge ruled,and that panel upheld.in the article I posted.

If that ruling stands,then 12 million illegals in this country are no longer illegal until the law is re-worded.

And they may be Grandfathered out of any future law written.

Lawyers ,I can see it now, are frothing at the bit,estimating all the loot they stand to make.

Someone has to start standing up for the citizens,but Trancado has a rep now,of being an extremista whacko.

I saw one defense attorney arguing with O.Reilly the other day about illegals and crime and having the last word,she made ,IMO, the dumbest statement yet.

She said "Only about 10% of illegal immigrants are criminals in the U.S....the other 90% are law abiding citizens".

EXCUSE ME ...HOW CAN AN ILLEGAL ALIEN BE DEEMED A CITIZEN???