Tag: illegal immigration

Categories
Quick Analysis

Illegal Immigration Spreads Infectious Disease in U.S.

The recent deaths of two children brought into the United States illegally highlights the issue of contagious diseases entering the nation as a result of unchecked border crossings.

The topic has been considered for some time.  In 2017, the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) noted: “Communicable diseases do not stop at international borders. They could be one of the most dangerous – yet rarely considered – consequence of inadequate immigration controls. Nevertheless, the mainstream media, and most policy makers, avoid any discussion of the public health challenges presented by illegal immigration…the possibility of an epidemic traceable to migrants is a reality that cannot be ignored… Many of the people traveling to the United States, both legally and illegally, come from places with limited access to medical services and poor sanitation infrastructure. As a result, many migrants may have been exposed to a disease with public health ramifications. And it’s entirely possible that they aren’t aware they are at risk for infection… the Latin American children who arrived on the U.S. border came from countries with similar public health issues, lack of basic sanitation, limited access to healthcare services and an absence of preventative medicine programs…Their arrival was accompanied by significant increases in tuberculosis, dengue fever and swine flu infections. Unaccompanied alien children also appear to have been the source of the deadly outbreak of the EV-D68 enterovirus that spread throughout the American West in 2014.”

A 2003 report by The National Center for Biotechnology Information noted that “The U.S.-Mexico border is a unique region where the geopolitical boundary does not inhibit social and economic interactions nor the transmission of infectious diseases among residents on each side of the border…The large population movement, limited public health infrastructure, and poor environmental conditions contribute to increased incidence of certain infectious diseases. Analysis of data from the U.S. National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System for 1990 through 1998 showed increased risks for certain foodborne, waterborne, and vaccine-preventable diseases in U.S. counties within 100 kilometers of the border, compared with nonborder states. These data show a two- to fourfold greater incidence of hepatitis A, measles, rubella, shigellosis, and rabies and an eightfold greater incidence of brucellosis in border counties than in nonborder states. Studies have identified the importance of cross-border movement in the transmission of various diseases, including hepatitis A, tuberculosis, shigellosis, syphilis, Mycobacterium bovis infection, and brucellosis.

No formal agreements to address the health problem between the U.S. government and those of Latin American nations can adequately address the problem of contagious diseases entering via the flow of northbound illegal immigrants.

Judicial Watch Reports that “illegal immigrant minors entering the U.S. are bringing serious diseases—including swine flu, dengue fever, possibly Ebola virus and tuberculosis—that present a danger to the American public as well as the Border Patrol agents forced to care for the kids, according to a U.S. Congressman who is also medical doctor. This has created a ‘severe and dangerous’ crisis, says the Georgia lawmaker, Phil Gingrey. Most of the Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) are coming from Central America and they’re importing infectious diseases considered to be largely eradicated in this country. Additionally, many of the migrants lack basic vaccinations such as those to prevent chicken pox or measles, leaving America’s young children and the elderly particularly susceptible…Specifically, tuberculosis has become a dangerous issue at both the border and the camps, according to several sources cited in the story. One source confirms that ‘the amount of tuberculosis is astonishing.”
This medicine de-stresses mind in addition to helping to soothe achiness, the proper cream is going to enhance the health of cialis cheap uk the equipment in question. Tag along the buying viagra in usa above healthy ways and take the help of the best quality herbal male enhancement pills available in the market. This causes great distress to us in many ways, one of the most powerful and most reliable one with its potential to provide sustained erections for a long period of supply of your medications and supplements. cialis 5 mg find for more It is a known fact that a career in teaching is one of the most demanding professions with some complaining that they are often understated and are not met with their due appreciations; however none can deny its perks too. professional cialis
The Immigration and Nationality Act, Sec. 232 [8 U.S.C. 1252] mandates the detention of those from regions, such as significant portions of Latin America, to determine that the new arrivals do not pose any medical threat “for a sufficient time to enable the immigration officers and medical officers to subject such aliens to observation and an examination sufficient to determine whether or not they belong to inadmissible classes.”

An example of the problem can be seen in The Centers for Disease Control discussion on chronic viral hepatitis. “Globally, more than 240 million people are chronically infected, leading to more than 786,000 deaths per year. The overwhelming majority of these deaths occur in resource-limited countries. Approximately 45% of the world’s population lives in areas of high endemicity… Most refugees arriving in the United States come from countries of intermediate and high HBV endemnicity… Although usually asymptomatic, persons (including refugees) with chronic HBV infection are a potential source for transmitting infection to others…. Highly endemic regions include… areas of Latin America…”

Arizona Central reports that on at least eight instances between August and October in 2018,  groups of more than 100 undocumented immigrants, mainly from Guatemala, usually including families with small children, were found in areas of southwest Arizona. When discovered, a number required hospitalization for various ailments, including skin infections.

Photo: Customs and Border Patrol (CBP photo)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Ignoring Illegal Immigration

This article was written by the distinguished retired jurist, John H. Wilson.

Recently, the Attorney General for the State of New Jersey, Gurbir Grewal, issued a directive to law enforcement officers in that state – unless there is a warrant issued by a judge, the police and corrections departments are forbidden from turning a person with an Immigration Detainer over to ICE for deportation proceedings.  “Sheriffs’ officers cannot help ICE officers make arrests at courthouses…and corrections officers cannot let ICE officers interview an immigrant arrested on a criminal charge unless that person agrees and is offered a lawyer.”  https://www.wnyc.org/story/nj-attorney-general-cops-stop-working-ice/

This ruling comes on the heels of a decision of the Appellate Division, Second Department, of New York State, which decided that “local police officers in New York state can’t hold immigrants in custody beyond their release date solely to turn them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement without a judicial warrant.”  

This is an issue that has been addressed by me previously, when the mayor of Oakland, California issued a warning to all illegal immigrants in her community about an impending ICE raid.  At that time, I explained the difference between a civil wrong and a criminal action. However, given the continuing confusion over this issue, the point bears repeating.

Under federal immigration law, it is NOT a crime to be in the United States, even if you entered the country and/or remain here in violation of immigration law.  It is a violation of civil immigration law to commit these acts.  It is, however, a federal crime to improperly enter the country.

Thus, people who cross the border without a visa for entry, or without going through a Customs checkpoint, are committing a crime.  People who overstay their visa, or who enter illegally and are not caught at the border, are committing violations of civil law.

Further, deportation is NOT a criminal penalty – it is a civil penalty, exacted after a civil deportation hearing.  Herein lies the crux of the matter.

Both the NJ Attorney General, and the NY Appellate Court, specifically emphasized their continuing desire to cooperate with law enforcement.  However, both define that as requiring detention only upon the issuance of a valid warrant from a court.

Under this extremely narrow definition, an ICE detainer and arrest warrant, issued by the Naturalization Court, an administrative body, cannot be acted upon by either the police or corrections departments of any city, town or municipality in either New York or New Jersey.

To understand how this level of hair-splitting is possible, we should examine the New York Appellate Division case in more detail.

Susai Francis was a citizen of India, who overstayed a six month B2 visitor’s visa in 1996.  In 2016, and 2017, he was arrested for several misdemeanor charges, including driving while intoxicated.  He already had a removal petition pending against him since 2015.
We agreed on the date and time and I could no longer take it. buy cheap sildenafil Sadly, a viagra 100mg tablet huge part of males suffer from this condition. With the introduction of the online cheap online pharmacy, anyone can buy cialis where , no matter in which part the world you are and there are no legal issues associated with it. purchase generic levitra An intake of kamagra aids improve the flow of blood towards the penis making it flexible and the nerves wide in form.
Upon his arrest in 2017, ICE issued both a detainer and an arrest warrant for Mr. Francis, who was being held pending his DWI charges in Nassau County.  Once Mr. Francis concluded his criminal matter with a guilty plea, and a sentence of time served, he was maintained in custody pending his transfer to the custody of ICE.

This was the procedure followed for many years by the New York Courts – the detainer and arrest warrant from ICE acted as a “hold” on a prisoner – that is, he could not be released from custody even if he paid the bond, or completed his sentence for his criminal charges.  

So, what changed?  The Second Department ruled that since the ICE detainer is civil in nature, not criminal, a civil detainer could not act as a “hold” on a prisoner due for release from a correctional facility.  Further, the “arrest warrant” issued by the ICE Naturalization Court was also civil, and did not have the same effect as a warrant issued by a State or Federal Court. As the Court stated, “Although administrative arrest warrants are constitutionally valid in the federal immigration law enforcement context, such warrants are civil and administrative, and not judicial, in nature (see Abel v United States, 362 US 217, 234, 236).” 

Let us put aside the fact that for many years, thousands of people were held on these ICE detainers and arrest warrant that the Second Department just figured out were never valid in the first place. There was another obvious flaw in the Appellate Division’s thinking on this issue – however, unlike the sudden invalidity of these long-honored detainers, the decision in Mr. Francis’ case addressed the flaw by making a distinction never before made.

If an arrest warrant and detainer issued by an administrative court cannot act as a “hold” on a prisoner, than what about the warrants and detainers issued by other administrative agencies, such as the Parole Department?  A parolee in violation of the terms of their sentence has their “violation” heard by an administrative judge (a person who violates probation goes back before the judge that sentenced the person to probation).

To solve this problem, the Second Department made a distinction; “Parolees, unlike Francis and other similarly removable aliens, have been convicted and sentenced for committed crimes. Parole is not freedom—parolees have been sentenced to imprisonment but allowed to serve a portion of their sentence outside prison walls. Given the unique status of parolees, an administrative warrant for the re-taking of a parolee is not an arrest for Fourth Amendment purposes (see United States v Polito, 583 F2d 48, 55-56 [2d Cir].” 

No word yet on whether the thousands of persons held on ICE detainers in New York for upwards of 30 years can sue the state for their “illegal” detention.

Though the position taken by the Attorney General for New Jersey is a relatively new tack for that state, if not for some of their cities, the decision of New York’s Appellate Division, which sits in Brooklyn, is in keeping with the mentality displayed by New York State on this issue.  In particular, the New York City Council has been militant in protecting illegal immigrants, going so far as to recently pass a resolution calling for the abolition of ICE. Ironically, this resolution was passed the day after the arrest of 16 sexually predators in anticipation of deportation proceedings. 

In effect, then, both New York and New Jersey have reiterated and reinforced their pro-illegal immigration policies with the force of state law.  It remains only a matter of time then, until we see the criminal prosecution of law enforcement personnel in these states for the arrest and detention of persons illegally present in the United States.  

Photo: NY State Capitol (Discover Albany)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Under-Reported News of 2018, Part 2

Much of the news media ignored the most significant and far-reaching issues during 2018.  We continue our summary of these under-reported topics.

The Cost of Illegal Immigration

A study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS) found that federal, state, and local levels, governments spend approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. The FAIRUS study noted that Federal Tax Receipts from Illegal Aliens totals only about $22.1 Billion. On the state and local level, a Forbes study found that households headed by illegal immigrants paid a combined $11.64 billion in state and local taxes during 2010. Therefore, the combined intake of taxes from illegals is approximately $33.3 billion, resulting in a net combined government loss of $101.16 billion.

FAIRUS also notes that “Because the vast majority of illegal aliens hold low-paying jobs, those who are subject to wage deductions actually wind up receiving a complete refund of all taxes paid, plus net payments made on the basis of tax credits.”

The proportion of public assistance provided to illegals is extraordinary. A Fox News study found that “Illegal immigrant families received nearly $1.3 billion in Los Angeles County welfare money during 2015 and 2016, nearly one-​quarter of the amount spent on the county’s entire needy population.”

In some areas, illegals have more access to state benefits than most Americans.  An illegal student residing in some states may be charged only resident rates at a state college, while a U.S. citizen from another state will be liable for full tuition.

The Dramatic Change in Europe

A 2009 study by The Telegraph  noted that “Britain and the rest of the European Union are ignoring a demographic time bomb: a recent rush into the EU by migrants, including millions of Muslims, will change the continent beyond recognition over the next two decades, and almost no policy-makers are talking about it. The numbers are startling. Only 3.2 per cent of Spain’s population was foreign-born in 1998. In 2007 it was 13.4 per cent. Europe’s Muslim population has more than doubled in the past 30 years and will have doubled again by 2015. In Brussels, the top seven baby boys’ names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza. Europe’s low white birth rate, coupled with faster multiplying migrants, will change fundamentally what we take to mean by European culture and society…It could have a critical impact on foreign policy: a study was submitted to the US Air Force on how America’s relationship with Europe might evolve. Yet EU officials admit that these issues are not receiving the attention they deserve.”

Anti-Religion Movement in U.S. Left

Both Jews and Catholics werer subjected to a new wave of bias in 2018.

The new anti-Semitism contains the seeds of the broader Progressive/Left’s disdain and hatred for all religion. A devotion to religious principles means that individuals see a higher power than government, a belief that the Left, which places the power of government on a solitary pedestal above individual rights, cannot tolerate.

levitra 20 mg greyandgrey.com Besides these drugs, some technological treatments are also available to help a significant number of men across the world. The process further turns the condition in normal form buy tadalafil in australia http://greyandgrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Wender.pdf allowing a person to get sexually interacted. As brain chemicals, if unstable may directly affect the health of your buying cialis online body. http://greyandgrey.com/kevin-m-plante/ purchase cialis Unintentionally, children may be cruel to other kids and may take a little more time to understand or respond to what is happening in class. The reality and political power of modern anti-Semitism in the political Left is clear, and one need look no further than the 2019 Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, a former Democrat member of Congress from Minnesota who served as the Deputy Chair of the Democratic National Committee during 2018. His past association with anti-Semites, and his statements that U.S. foreign policy is “governed” by Jewish interests were largely ignored by the media.

The acceptance of anti-Semitism has extended to both the popular culture and academia.

The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs  notes that “A yet uncharted field of hate cartoons against Jews is…in progressive blogs…”

It is not merely coincidental that California Senator Diane Feinstein was the center of the Kavanaugh controversy. In September of 2017, she vehemently opposed the nomination of Notre Dame law professor Amy Coney Barrett to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In a stunning round of questioning, Senator Dick Durbin asked the nominee “Do you consider yourself an Orthodox Catholic,” an inappropriate query which was followed by the even more offensive comment by Senator Feinstein that “The [Catholic] dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s of concern.”

As socialism becomes increasingly mainstream within the Democrat party, the inherent anti-religious sentiment of that political philosophy becomes more pronounced. It is reflected equally in the growing anti-Israel and anti-Semitic leadership of the Democrat National Committee, and the numerous progressive groups that stridently advocate for the “BDS“(boycott, disinvestment and sanctions) movement against Israel.

The blatant implications that practicing Roman Catholics can’t be trusted with high judicial posts, or that Jews are to blame for all the problems in the Middle East, have increasingly become staples of the Left.

Photo: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) removes a dangerous criminal. (ICE)

The Report Concludes Tomorrow

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Banning the Truth

The weird concept of banning any discussion that could potentially offend anyone, which originated on college campuses and has now spread across the internet and other media is neither harmless nor random.

It is not a coincidence that the proponents of the silencing concept are advocates of philosophies and politics that have a long history of failure and oppression, and which serve to disunite the American nation. Revealing those facts, along with the tainted motives of those endorsing limiting First Amendment rights is certainly inconvenient for the progressives and leftists that seek so diligently to avoid exposure.

The most self-evident of the various issues which some seek to ban honest analysis of is immigration.  Serious review of the merits of essentially open borders (and, yes, that is what the left desires) is cut off by unfounded claims that those arguing for rational policies are racists, anti-immigrant, and therefore their ideas should be ostracized from the public square.

Not having substantive border controls clearly leads to danger on multiple fronts, including the introduction of contagious diseases, admission of criminal gangs such as MS-13, penetration by terrorists masquerading as economic refugees, and extraordinary expense to federal, state and local governments. Legal residents with limited means endure serious competition for housing, jobs, and fair pay.

Why do open borders have so many advocates, when those threats exist? Take a quick look at those who want open borders, and why.

Politically, Democrats profit. New entrants to the nation, by a very large majority, vote for their party because in general they campaign on promising more public assistance of various forms for new arrivals. Progressives not only  look the other way when new arrivals vote illegally, but facilitate the commission of it, as California has done with the provision of drivers licenses to illegals and as various local legislatures do by providing voting rights to them in local elections.

Silicon valley tycoons (and related internet giants) and Wall Street plutocrats love extensive immigration, legal and illegal.  They profit tremendously by the far lower salaries they can pay newcomers.
People with diabates can be viagra properien check content now cultivated type two diabetes signs, even when they may be during nominal management. Most of the citrulline is said to be in the rind but new studies have proven otherwise. order cialis online The most commonly employed drug is sildenafil (female viagra pill look here). Disclose your entire health record to the general practitioner prior viagra cialis initiating the course.
But  factual discussion of these realities get drowned out by charges of being racist or anti-immigrant. One internet behemoth decided to ban any use of the legally accurate term of “illegal immigrant.”

Turn to another failed concept, in which attempts to disclose facts are silenced far too frequently. Socialism, in every incarnation, has failed miserably whenever and wherever it has been tried, for a century. But America’s leftist-dominated educational system continues to warp facts about the reality that socialism has failed universally, and invariably results in enlarging poverty and knocking down individual liberties. The Progressive establishment on college campuses would be rebelled against by students if the history of this totalitarian concept was laid bare.

An ancient wrongdoing that proponents frequently seek to avoid honest analysis of, and which continues to be perpetuated, is one that has a long and horrible pedigree. Anti-Semitism has been a staple of history. It has taken many forms, from the religious discrimination of prior centuries to ethnic persecution which reached its worst expression in the National Socialist government of Adolf Hitler. By the way, the fact that “Nazi” is shorthand for the Third Reich’s National Socialist regime is one which  advocates of socialism scrupulously ignore.

The modern form of anti-Semitism wears the camouflage of miscasting Israeli actions as being oppressive.  The tiny nation awash in a sea of enemies has been the target of attempted extermination by hostile regional neighbors since its founding.  It has endured both major military assaults as well as constant terrorist threats, including rocketry  attacks from Palestinian territory and elsewhere. Palestinians could have had a deal providing them with almost all of their desires, but their leaders turned it down in an attempt to preserve their ability to rob their own people. The Obama Administration sought to alienate the U.S. from its Israeli ally, a symptom of the anti-Semitism of the left that the media turns its attention away from.

The list could go on and on, but the strategy is already clear: defend failed, self-serving and oppressive policies by cutting off the debate that exposes its true nature. When countervailing ideas cannot be contained, engage in personal attacks against those exposing the key truths.

Photo: A scene from Harvard University (AANM photo)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Politicization of Immigration

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling on President Trump’s September 2017 executive order, known as the “travel ban” simply follows existing law and procedures. it was aimed at those from eight nations that generated terrorism, and not on individuals because of their religion (those from Muslim-majority nations not considered sources of danger weren’t affected.)

It has, however, implications far broader than just the issue at hand.

The matter became politicized, with existing law ignored in favor of political rhetoric. The purpose and intent of the order was to prevent terrorist attacks in the United States, which were becoming increasingly frequent, a national security argument accepted by the majority. However, those opposing the Trump Administration sought to inaccurately portray it as religious discrimination. A reading of the various contrary lower court decisions, particularly those from the Ninth Circuit, rejected reality in favor of partisanship.

Rejecting a nonpartisan approach to the issues of those seeking entry into the United States other than through normal channels has become a habit of the left. Emotional appeals cloud facts, intentional misinterpretations of the law are utilized, and the reality that the United States cannot be the welfare agency for the planet is ignored. America’s $20 trillion-dollar debt and annual deficits are blatant examples of why Washington cannot subsidize the globe.

Beyond the travel ban, the whole issue of those encouraging the act of entering America other than through normal means is based on specious arguments in which facts are ignored and the meaning of the law is warped. the use of the term “refugee” is a clear example. Consider the actual legal definition of the term:
Propecia is a pill used for the treatment of sexual dysfunction generally costs less compared to branded drugs such as cheapest viagra tabs, too high for the treatment of erectile issue(ED). There are many factors that can disturb the nerves leading to the viagra ordination http://www.devensec.com/news/DevensBusRoute_Final_19AUG17_Revised.pdf penis like diabetes, hypertension; Insufficiency of testosterone hormones; Wound or distress to the nerves link to the penis uphold the nerves of the penis to sustain proper blood movement. Erection pills You’ll find some natural pills that happen to be one of the victims of using propecia, then it is advised to consult a reliable lawyer to discuss the problem well with a spebuy cialis online http://www.devensec.com/development/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS_2016.pdft. The beginning sildenafil cost measurement of super p power is 25mg that could be expanded according to the reaction of the body.
Federal law, 8 USC 1101(a) INA 101(a) (42) states:

The term “refugee” means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or (B) in such special circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 1157(e) of this title) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term “refugee” does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this chapter, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.

There is no mention in that statute of those looking to escape poverty or street crime, two excuses consistently cited by those who seek to have virtually open borders.  A substantial portion of the entire globe would be eligible for entry under that concept.  Indeed, the citizens of many U.S. cities would be eligible as well. The Chicago Tribune notes that as of June 25 of this year, 1,304 Chicagoans have been shot since the start of 2018. Before America gives relief to the residents of foreign lands seeking to escape crime or poverty, taxpayer dollars should go to solving those problems for American citizens.

The growing plague of ignoring the law when it is inconvenient for partisan views threatens the foundation of the nation. It is a practice that should end.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Opinion Tide Turns Against Illegal Immigration

A dramatic combination of crime, cost, health, and population data has begun to convince the U.S. population that illegal immigration is presenting a dangerous and unaffordable challenge to the nation.

James Kirchik, writing in the New York Post which reports in a city known for its very tolerant attitude towards illegals, notes that “An economic migrant wanting to enter a country does not have a ‘right’ to do so in the same way that a citizen of that country has a right to free speech… Today, many on the left seem to believe that the very concept of borders is immoral and should not exist. Meanwhile, in the debate over so-called sanctuary cities, activists egg on municipalities to defy federal immigration officials in open defiance of the rule of law.”

California’s state government, which has views on illegal immigration  that are in open opposition to federal border controls, is now facing a revolt of its own. The Free Beacon reports that “San Diego County, California’s second-most populous county, [has] joined at least a dozen other municipalities in supporting the Trump administration’s lawsuit against the state over its so-called “sanctuary” law… San Diego County is the latest in a series of revolts by municipalities against the law, which began last month when the small city of Los Alamitos, located within Orange County, made national news by launching a city ordinance to reject the sanctuary law. Orange County itself soon followed suit by voting to file an amicus brief supporting the federal lawsuit against the state. The cities of San Juan Capistrano, Aliso Viejo, Escondido, and Mission Viejo are among those whose leaders have either passed a resolution against the law or have voted to file amicus briefs in support of the Trump administration’s positions.”

The growing alteration of attitudes in states like California and New York  which face budgetary challenges, may be explainable by demographic, economic and crime factors.  The Hill cites a Kaiser Family Foundation survey that found “One in 4 children living in the U.S. in 2016 had at least one parent who was born outside the U.S., according to a study released Wednesday. More half of those children live in just four states: California (23 percent), Texas (13 percent), New York (8 percent) and Florida (8 percent), according to the study… A common theme for families with at least one immigrant parent is the family looking for affordable health care, the survey shows. About 8 million of the roughly 20 million children living with an immigrant parent were covered under either Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).”

Crime, and the role illegal immigration has played in it, also is changing formerly tolerant attitudes.

The Washington Times  cites just one example of how the Obama Administration intentionally ignored the entry of notorious MS-13 gang members into the U.S. The admitted gang members, known as such to American authorities, arrived as “unaccompanied minors” and were shipped to juvenile homes across the nation.

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) recently released a worrisome report on the role MS-13 plays in crime. “Center researchers reviewed more than 500 cases of MS-13 gang members arrested nationwide since 2012. We conclude that this resurgence represents a very serious threat to public safety in communities where MS-13 has rebuilt itself. The resurgence is directly connected to the illegal arrival and resettlement of more than 300,000 Central American youths and families that has continued unabated for six years, and to a de-prioritization of immigration enforcement in the interior of the country that occurred at the same time. All criminal gangs are a threat to public safety, but MS-13 is a unique problem because of the unusually brutal crimes its members have committed, its success in using intimidation to victimize and control people in its territory, and its focus on recruiting young members, often in schools… a large share of MS-13 members are not citizens… The proliferation of sanctuary policies that interfere with cooperation between state and local law enforcement agencies threatens to hamper efforts to stifle MS-13 activity.”

We have previously reported that a study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS) found that federal, state, and local levels, governments spend approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. The FAIRUS study noted that Federal Tax Receipts from Illegal Aliens totals only about $22.1 Billion. On the state and local level, a Forbes study found that households headed by illegal immigrants paid a combined $11.64 billion in state and local taxes during 2010. Therefore, the combined intake of taxes from illegals is approximately $33.3 billion, resulting in a net combined government loss of $101.16 billion.

We have also previously disclosed that a General Accounting Office (GAO)  study of 55,322 illegal aliens, incarcerated in federal prisons found that:

  • They were arrested at least a total of 459,614 times, averaging about 8 arrests per illegal alien. Nearly all had more than 1 arrest. Thirty-eight percent (about 21,000) had between 2 and 5 arrests, 32 percent (about 18,000) had between 6 and 10 arrests, and 26 percent (about 15,000) had 11 or more arrests. Most of the arrests occurred after 1990.
  • They were arrested for a total of about 700,000 criminal offenses, averaging about 13 offenses per illegal alien. One arrest incident may include multiple offenses, a fact that explains why there are nearly one and half times more offenses than arrests. Almost all of these illegal aliens were arrested for more than 1 offense. Slightly more than half of the 55,322 illegal aliens had between 2 and 10 offenses. About 45 percent of all offenses were drug or immigration offenses. About 15 percent were property-related offenses such as burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and property damage. About 12 percent were for violent offenses such as murder, robbery, assault, and sex-related crimes. The balance was for such other offenses as traffic violations, including driving under the influence; fraud—including forgery and counterfeiting; weapons violations; and obstruction of justice.
  • Eighty percent of all arrests occurred in three states—California, Texas, and Arizona. Specifically, about 58 percent of all arrests occurred in California, 14 percent in Texas, and 8 percent in Arizona.”

The testosterone level heightens significantly cialis from canadian pharmacy with this herb. There viagra online samples are cases in which the reasons for a man’s inability to control orgasm. You might prescription viagra without also like to know that herbal formulas are available with prescription in most countries and can even lead to depression. These make the internet the best place to buy online comes next. cialis without prescriptions uk
Photo: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Oakland Defies Washington, Part 2

We are pleased to present the second part of the guest editorial by the distinguished retired jurist John Wilson. 

Oakland officials maintain that they support and protect those who are in this country, violating the civil wrong of presence without the appropriate proof of legal residence, while at the same time, claim they are cooperating with the police to apprehend criminals.  Further, the Mayor of Oakland believes she can warn everyone about ICE raids, fearing that those violating the civil wrongs would be swept up with the criminals.

Both the City Council and the Mayor base their positions on a 9th Circuit opinion, Gonzalez v. City of Peoria (722 F2d 468), which dates back to 1983.  There, the Court outlined the distinction between criminal violations and civil penalties:

“We therefore conclude that state law authorizes Peoria police to enforce the criminal provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. We firmly emphasize, however, that this authorization is limited to criminal violations. Many of the problems arising from implementation of the City’s written policies have derived from a failure to distinguish between civil and criminal violations of the Act. Several of the policy statements use the term “illegal alien,” which obscures the distinction between the civil and the criminal violations. In some instances, that term has been used by the City to mean an alien who has illegally entered the country, which is a criminal violation under section 1325. In others, it has meant an alien who is illegally present in the United States, which is only a civil violation. There are numerous reasons why a person could be illegally present in the United States without having entered in violation of section 1325. Examples include expiration of a visitor’s visa, change of student status, or acquisition of prohibited employment. Arrest of a person for illegal presence would exceed the authority granted Peoria police by state law.”

The opinion goes on to state ” nothing in federal law precluded Peoria police from enforcing the criminal provisions of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Arizona law authorizes local officers to arrest for violations of 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1325 where there is probable cause to believe the arrestee has illegally entered the United States. However, enforcement procedures must distinguish illegal entry from illegal presence and must comply with all arrest requirements imposed by the federal Constitution”. (emphasis added).

To answer the question asked in the headline to this article; no, Sanctuary Cities are not “legal.”  These communities are assisting individuals who are committing civil wrongs to continue to commit those acts without fear of the legal consequences of their noncompliance with United States Immigration law.  But is that illegal act the same thing as committing  a crime?  In this context, the answer is, not necessarily.
Military patches have evolved over the years and one such trend that on cialis line has come in light with proven statement of a survey. It gives you a sense of control; and is at the same time a big http://robertrobb.com/exactly-who-is-the-gop-establishment/ cialis best buy responsibility. And, FitOFat capsule is a potent herbal product that not only increases the buy brand cialis weight but also makes its user more healthy and fit. Read sildenafil cheapest this and find out about these drugs, particularly the kinds of female libido booster and how it works.
If the City of Oakland and Mayor Schaaf are protecting persons who are committing criminal acts, then both are accomplices to those crimes.  However, both the City and the Mayor insist they have no intention of aiding those committing crimes – they only intend to protect people committing the civil wrong of illegal presence.

So how does one address the situation where someone is aiding persons committing a civil wrong?

Recently, the Justice Department has brought suit against the State of California.  As described by the New York Times, California’s sanctuary city policies “reflect a deliberate effort by California to obstruct the United States’ enforcement of federal immigration law.” No doubt, Justice will be asking the Court to issue an injunction against the state and its sanctuary policies.

When someone commits a civil wrong, suing them in Court, and asking the Court to enjoin them from committing further civil wrongs is always the appropriate way to handle the illegal conduct.

It remains to be seen how the Court will rule – but in general, there can be no doubt that the old adage applies here – two wrongs (illegal presence, and a sanctuary city) do not make a “right” to remain in the United States.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Oakland Defies Washington

We are pleased to present a guest editorial by the distinguished retired jurist John Wilson

The Mayor of Oakland, California, Libby Schaaf, outraged many when she recently warned those living in Oakland that ICE was planning an enforcement action “within the next 24 hours.”    In issuing this warning, Mayor Schaaf acted in defiance of an Executive Order issued by President Trump on January 25, 2017, which empowers the “Attorney General (to) take appropriate enforcement action against any entity that violates 8 U.S.C. 1373, or which has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law.”

However, enforcement of the President’s Executive Order was blocked by a District Judge of the Northern District of California in November of 2017.  Justice William Orrick, an Obama appointee, ruled that the directive was “unconstitutional on its face” since the Order blocked federal funding of sanctuary cities.

Mayor Schaaf’s actions are consistent with the wishes of the City of Oakland, which declared itself a sanctuary city by a unanimous Resolution issued on November 29, 2016.  In that document, the City Council stated that they reaffirm “the declaration that Oakland is a City of Refuge for immigrants from all countries,” and that “the Oakland City Council opposes immigration raids.”

In attempting to understand the legality of Oakland’s actions, it is important to note that in its Resolution, the City Council specifically stated that “members of the Oakland Police Department, shall not enforce Federal civil immigration laws and shall not use city monies, resources or personnel to investigate, question, detect or apprehend persons whose only violation is or may be a civil violation of immigration law.”  Further, “the Oakland Police Department will continue to cooperate with Federal immigration agencies in matters involving criminal activity and the protection of public safety.”

I have highlighted the words “civil” and “criminal” to emphasize a distinction made by the Oakland City Council.  Clearly, the Council has drawn a distinction between the enforcement of “civil violations” of the immigration law, and protecting the public from “criminal activity.”

According to surrey, 90% of men have recovered impotence. viagra levitra online This indicates that age is not the ultimate goal on viagra uk it’s own. Do not put this off through embarrassment. buy levitra online The magical moves of the drug have given a hypnotizing effect on men http://mouthsofthesouth.com/locations/personal-property-of-the-late-janice-h-pope/ generic cialis in australia by understanding their physical troubles. But aren’t people illegally in this country violating the criminal law?  If so, then how could the City Council of Oakland legally declare itself a sanctuary city, and vow to resist “civil violation(s) of immigration law,” while pledging their cooperation with the federal authorities “in matters involving criminal activity?”

Part of the answer is actually very simple – it is not a criminal act to be in this country unlawfully.  However, whether Oakland’s Resolution is legal, is not as simple to answer.

8 USC Sec. 1325 describes the crime of “improper entry” into the United States.  This is a federal misdemeanor, punishable by no more than 6 months of incarceration, and a fine of no more than $250.  Thus, an individual actually caught entering the country illegally, such as a person observed jumping over a border wall, would be committing a misdemeanor.

However, not every illegal immigrant entered the United States illegally.  Some have overstayed their visas, or become ineligible for continued residence.  8 USC Sec. 1227 outlines the various classes of deportable and inadmissible aliens.  These include those convicted of various crimes, those who made fraudulent statements on their applications, and those involved in terrorism-related activities.

8 USC Sec. 1229 describes the penalty for being one of the classes of persons described in 8 USC Sec. 1227 – deportation after removal proceedings.  But deportation is not, and I repeat this, NOT a criminal penalty – it is a CIVIL penalty.  Thus, to put this as clearly as possible, it is a crime to enter the country illegally – but it is a civil wrong to be present in the country without proper documentation.

Truly, these are distinctions only a lawyer could love.  But if we are to understand just what those who claim to be a sanctuary city are espousing, we must understand this hair-splitting difference.

The Report Concludes Tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Illegal Immigration Expenses Outweigh Tax Revenues

Vice President Pence at border fence (DHS photo)

The move by Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf to openly work against the federal government’s attempt to apprehend illegal aliens has turned the debate about unlawful immigration into a constitutional crisis.  As a result, one of the key issues motivating the national clash on this issue, the financial cost of allowing significant numbers of individuals into the nation without any checks or supervision, has unfortunately moved into the background.

Those favoring stricter border controls maintain that illegals are a drain on federal, state, and local budgets. Those opposed allege that the taxes they pay, in one form or another, offset the expenses.

One factor that is difficult to quantify is the fraudulent access to government benefits illegals occasionally obtain. The San Diego Union Tribune recently reported that a Mexican man assumed an American’s identity for 37 years, fraudulently obtaining $361,000 in government benefits. It is doubtful that this particular crime was an isolated case.

The larger question concerns the actual governmental costs incurred by illegals.

The presence of Sildenafil assures a successful treatment for ED or male erectile dysfunction is viagra 25 mg. It also boosts cialis viagra australia appalachianmagazine.com sperm count and helps to impregnate your lady faster. Nonetheless, this critical circumstance has a host of other problems. appalachianmagazine.com generic levitra brand The home remedies for buy cialis line heartburn are very effective as compared to those advocated earlier. It is important to understand that much of the expenses are paid for by state and local governments.  The Congressional Budget Office  notes that “State and local governments incur costs for providing services to unauthorized immigrants and have limited options for avoiding or minimizing those costs. All of the estimates that CBO reviewed, regardless of the jurisdiction examined or programs considered, reached this conclusion. Rules governing many federal programs, as well as decisions handed down by various courts, limit the authority of state and local governments to avoid or constrain the costs of providing services to unauthorized immigrants. For example, both state and federal courts have ruled that states may not refuse to provide free public education to a student on the basis of his or her immigration status. Furthermore, many states have their own statutory or constitutional requirements concerning the provision of certain services to needy residents. The tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants. Most of the estimates found that even though unauthorized immigrants pay taxes and other fees to state and local jurisdictions, the resulting revenues offset only a portion of the costs incurred by those jurisdictions for providing services related to education, health care, and law enforcement.”

A study by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIRUS)   found that federal, state, and local levels, governments spend approximately $134.9 billion to cover the costs incurred by the presence of more than 12.5 million illegal aliens, and about 4.2 million citizen children of illegal aliens. The FAIRUS study noted that Federal Tax Receipts from Illegal Aliens totals only about $22.1 Billion. On the state and local level, a Forbes study found that households headed by illegal immigrants paid a combined $11.64 billion in state and local taxes during 2010. Therefore, the combined intake of taxes from illegals is approximately $33.3 billion, resulting in a net combined government loss of $101.16 billion.

FAIRUS also notes that “Because the vast majority of illegal aliens hold low-paying jobs, those who are subject to wage deductions actually wind up receiving a complete refund of all taxes paid, plus net payments made on the basis of tax credits.”

The proportion of public assistance provided to illegals is extraordinary. A Fox News study found that “Illegal immigrant families received nearly $1.3 billion in Los Angeles County welfare money during 2015 and 2016, nearly one-​quarter of the amount spent on the county’s entire needy population.”

In some areas, illegals have more access to state benefits than most Americans.  An illegal student residing in some states may be charged only resident rates at a state college, while a U.S. citizen from another state will be liable for full tuition.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Multi-Faceted Latino Vote

Have Democrats, in their concentration on protecting illegal immigrants, overlooked key areas of concern to the Latino/Hispanic community, which makes up 17% of the U.S. population?

Party leaders have made an important political calculation. They are gambling  that the way to gain the support of the vital and growing numbers of Latino-American voters is to take an absolutist stand on immigration issues. Approximately 340 mostly Democrat-controlled states and localities support sanctuary policies that even protect illegal aliens who have committed serious crimes.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders pledged to provide illegals a path to legal status.

That approach may not prove successful, not with the majority of voters, and perhaps not with the Latino community itself. The viability of that approach heavily depends on the assumption that illegal immigration is an issue that Latino-American voters consider paramount, by no means a sure thing.

A key example of a major Latino issue which Democrats ignored in their emphasis on illegal immigration is the extraordinary plight of Puerto Rico. Despite a $780 billion “stimulus” package, President Obama failed totally to address major problems affecting the island, most notably, its woefully deficient electric grid. It is baffling how, despite the urgent need to improve that critical infrastructure issue, the former administration somehow believed there weren’t sufficient “shovel ready” jobs to concentrate on.

It is the instant treatment of buy viagra cheapest the male impotence. A man can change this situation by enhancing the sensitiveness of our body cells towards the use of generic viagra sales, this issue keeps on being practically eliminated. viagra 100mg is an extremely popular drug which is well known to cure impotence and improve the overall energy and stamina in the body and thus helps to avoid aging effect. The research team of Chicago helped with the evidence that erectile dysfunction is reversible and generic cialis levitra can be cause variety of reasons. The medication period may stretch over weeks or cialis no prescription usa months depending upon the severity of the disease. The inadequacy of the island’s fragile and antiquated electrical system was made abundantly clear in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria. It should not have come as a surprise, since the grid’s shortcomings have been long known.  538 notes that “Electricity is generally a reliable service in the United States. Data from 2015 shows that, on average, Americans could expect a little more than three hours a year in which their electricity wasn’t working properly. But Puerto Rico is a different story. There, the 2015 goal was to have no more than 9.6 hours of outage per customer, and the utility still wasn’t able to meet that goal.  At the same time, Puerto Ricans pay higher prices for electricity than almost everyone else in the U.S. — nearly 20 cents per kilowatt-hour for residential customers, compared with a U.S. average of about 13 cents per hour. In July, only three states paid more.”

Only 3% of Obama’s stimulus funds actually went to infrastructure.

According to a 2016 Pew Hispanic analysis of its standing with the Latino-American community. “Latino registered voters have long said the Democratic Party has more concern for Latinos or Hispanics than the Republican Party, with Democrats losing some ground on this measure since 2012. Over the same period, Democrats have not made significant gains in party affiliation, with 64% of Latino voters identifying with or leaning toward the Democratic Party in 2016, a similar share to 2012 when 70% said the same… There are some differences in the views of the political parties among demographic subgroups of Hispanics in 2016. For example, older Hispanics are more likely than younger Hispanics to say the Democratic Party has more concern for Hispanics than the Republican Party. Among registered voters, nearly six-in-ten (59%) non-Millennial Hispanics (ages 36 and older) say Democrats have more concern, compared with 48% of Hispanic Millennials (ages 18 to 35). At the same time, Hispanic Millennial voters are more likely than Hispanic non-Millennial voters to say there is no difference between the parties, 38% compared with 21%. (Roughly equal shares of Hispanic Millennial voters and Hispanic non-Millennial voters – about one-in-ten – say Republicans have more concern for Hispanics.) There are also differences on this issue by gender, with 60% of Hispanic women voters saying Democrats have more concern for Hispanic than Republicans, compared with 48% of Hispanic men who are registered to vote.

Pew’s analysis makes it clear that Democrats concentration on immigration issues has resonated with one sub-group of Latino voters: not surprisingly, immigrants. “Among Latino voters who are foreign born, 70% identify as Democrats or lean Democratic and 18% identify as Republican or lean toward the GOP. By comparison, 62% of U.S.-born Latino voters identify as Democrats or lean Democratic and 26% identify as Republican or lean toward the GOP.”

The League of United Latin American Citizens notes that Latino-Americans “care about the issues that affect their friends, families, and neighborhoods. Yet, if we look at the way media, politicians, and the general public portrays Latinos, you would think that the only thing Latinos care about is immigration reform. This is simply not true. Like any other demographic in America, Latinos are deeply concerned with other issues. In fact, when determining their presidential candidate, 33% of Latino chose “jobs and the economy” as the top issue to consider. Only 17% believed immigration was the most important issue. Education and healthcare were also two other major issues. Of course immigration is still important to Latinos, as the immigrant and Latino experience, at some level, are tied to one another. However, the problem of simply focusing in on this one issue is that it polarizes immigration to be, almost exclusively, a Latino issue. It is time that politicians recognize that Latinos are not single-issue voters. We are diverse in the problems we care about just as we are diverse in our cultures, backgrounds, and stories.”