http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/2/illegal-immigrant-killed-nun-released-by-feds/
UPDATED:
The Virginia man suspected in a drunken-driving crash that killed a Catholic nun in Prince William County this weekend is an illegal immigrant and repeat offender who was awaiting deportation and whom federal immigration authorities had released pending further proceedings, police said Monday.
Carlos Montano, a county resident, has been charged with involuntary manslaughter and drunken driving. Mr. Montano had been arrested two other times on drunken-driving charges, and on at least one of those occasions county police reported him to federal authorities.
"We have determined that he is in the country illegally. He has been arrested by Prince William County Police in the past, said police spokesman Jonathan Perok.
He said U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was notified at the time of one of those arrests. "At the time of this incident, the accident yesterday, he was in the deportation process and was out on his recognizance for court proceedings."
The crash at around 8:30 Sunday morning killed Sister Denise Mosier and injured two other nuns as they were driving to a retreat at the Benedictine Monastery in Bristow, Va. The two injured nuns were in critical but stable condition late Monday, according to St. Gertrude High School in Richmond run by the Benedictine Sisters of Virginia.
Mr. Montano was being treated for injuries he received in the crash and was expected to be released from the hospital into police custody as early as Monday evening.
Messages left with ICE and the Homeland Security Department were not returned, but the incident raises questions about the agency's policy of detaining only some illegal immigrants awaiting deportation.
"I have been saying for months now that this administration's new policy of concentrating almost solely on 'criminal aliens,' and not enforcing the laws by deporting known illegal aliens, would have devastating consequences. Now, we see the tragic results this 'virtual amnesty' policy of the Obama administration has caused," said Rep. Harold Rogers of Kentucky, the ranking Republican on the House Appropriations homeland security subcommittee.
Showing posts with label Illegal Aliens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Illegal Aliens. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Arizona Immigration Law Castrated
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/28/federal-judge-rules-arizona-immigration-law-dispute/
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked some of the toughest provisions in the Arizona illegal immigration law, putting on hold the state's attempt to have local police enforce federal immigration policy.
Though the rest of the law is still set to go into effect Thursday, the partial injunction on SB 1070 means Arizona, for the time being, will not be able to require police officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest.
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also struck down the section of law that makes it a crime not to carry immigration registration papers and the provision that makes it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek or perform work.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, reacting to the ruling, said the "fight is far from over" and vowed to take the case "all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary."
"The bottom line is we've known all along that it is the responsibility of the feds," Brewer told The Associated Press. "They haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The Mexican government praised the judge's decision. Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa told reporters that the injunction was a "first step in the right direction."
In all, Bolton struck down four sections of the law, the ones that opponents called the most controversial. Bolton said she was putting those sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.
The ruling said the Obama administration, which sought the injunction, is likely to "succeed on the merits" in showing the above provisions are preempted by federal law.
"The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money," the ruling said. "Even though Arizona's interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws."
A number of provisions will still go into effect as the case is litigated. Arizona will be able to block state officials from so-called "sanctuary city" policies limiting enforcement of federal law; require that state officials work with federal officials on illegal immigration; allow civil suits over sanctuary cities; and make it a crime to pick up day laborers.
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations to speak out against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said the court "ruled correctly" with its decision Wednesday.
"While we understand the frustration of Arizonans with the broken immigration system, a patchwork of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement and would ultimately be counterproductive," August said.
The Department of Homeland Security released a statement saying the decision "affirms the federal government's responsibilities" to enforce immigration law. The department claimed "unprecedented resources" have been devoted to that effort.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., one of the most vocal advocates on immigration issues on Capitol Hill, applauded the decision.
"Arresting people based on their appearance and holding them until you can investigate their immigration status is patently un-American and unconstitutional," he said.
But supporters of the policy slammed the court's decision.
"This fight is far from over. In fact, it is just the beginning, and at the end of what is certain to be a long legal struggle, Arizona will prevail in its right to protect our citizens," Brewer said.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., called the ruling "misguided."
"The federal government has a right and a responsibility to enforce existing laws, but when they fail to meet that responsibility, we should not stand in the way of the states that take action to respond to the very real threat of border violence, drug cartels and human smuggling," he said in a written statement. "There's nowhere in the Constitution that says a state is limited to what it absolutely won't do and can be stopped for what it might do and to exercise a judgment against a state that has passed a law that is consistent with existing federal law is beyond absurd."
The volume of the protests will likely be turned down a few notches because of the ruling by Bolton, a Clinton appointee who suddenly became a crucial figure in the immigration debate when she was assigned the seven lawsuits filed against the Arizona law.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona -- the busiest illegal gateway into the country -- to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants.
Opponents argued the law will lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
Localities inside Arizona were already preparing to interpret the law in different ways. The Tucson Unified School District's Governing Board approved by a 5-0 vote a policy Tuesday that maintains the district's stance of not enforcing immigration laws in the district's schools.
The hardest-line approach was expected in the Phoenix area, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio plans his 17th crime and immigration sweep. He planned to hold the sweep regardless of the ruling.
Arpaio, known for his tough stance against illegal immigration, plans to send out about 200 deputies and volunteers who will be looking for traffic violators, people wanted on criminal warrants and others. He has used that tactic before to arrest dozens of people, many of them illegal immigrants.
"We don't wait. We just do it," he said. "If there's a new law out, we're going to enforce it."
Elsewhere in the state, police officials were busy wrapping up training sessions this week. Many of the state's 15,000 police officers have been watching a DVD released this month that signs that might indicate a person is an illegal immigrant are speaking poor English, looking nervous or traveling in an overcrowded vehicle. It warned that race and ethnicity do not.
Some agencies added extra materials, including a test, a role-playing exercise or a question-and-answer session with prosecutors.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
A federal judge on Wednesday blocked some of the toughest provisions in the Arizona illegal immigration law, putting on hold the state's attempt to have local police enforce federal immigration policy.
Though the rest of the law is still set to go into effect Thursday, the partial injunction on SB 1070 means Arizona, for the time being, will not be able to require police officers to determine the immigration status of anyone they stop or arrest.
U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton also struck down the section of law that makes it a crime not to carry immigration registration papers and the provision that makes it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek or perform work.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, reacting to the ruling, said the "fight is far from over" and vowed to take the case "all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary."
"The bottom line is we've known all along that it is the responsibility of the feds," Brewer told The Associated Press. "They haven't done their job so we were going to help them do that."
The Mexican government praised the judge's decision. Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa told reporters that the injunction was a "first step in the right direction."
In all, Bolton struck down four sections of the law, the ones that opponents called the most controversial. Bolton said she was putting those sections on hold until the courts resolve the issues.
The ruling said the Obama administration, which sought the injunction, is likely to "succeed on the merits" in showing the above provisions are preempted by federal law.
"The court by no means disregards Arizona's interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime including the trafficking of humans, drugs, guns, and money," the ruling said. "Even though Arizona's interests may be consistent with those of the federal government, it is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws."
A number of provisions will still go into effect as the case is litigated. Arizona will be able to block state officials from so-called "sanctuary city" policies limiting enforcement of federal law; require that state officials work with federal officials on illegal immigration; allow civil suits over sanctuary cities; and make it a crime to pick up day laborers.
The ruling came just as police were making last-minute preparations to begin enforcement of the law and protesters were planning large demonstrations to speak out against the measure. At least one group planned to block access to federal offices, daring officers to ask them about their immigration status.
Justice Department spokeswoman Hannah August said the court "ruled correctly" with its decision Wednesday.
"While we understand the frustration of Arizonans with the broken immigration system, a patchwork of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement and would ultimately be counterproductive," August said.
The Department of Homeland Security released a statement saying the decision "affirms the federal government's responsibilities" to enforce immigration law. The department claimed "unprecedented resources" have been devoted to that effort.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., one of the most vocal advocates on immigration issues on Capitol Hill, applauded the decision.
"Arresting people based on their appearance and holding them until you can investigate their immigration status is patently un-American and unconstitutional," he said.
But supporters of the policy slammed the court's decision.
"This fight is far from over. In fact, it is just the beginning, and at the end of what is certain to be a long legal struggle, Arizona will prevail in its right to protect our citizens," Brewer said.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., called the ruling "misguided."
"The federal government has a right and a responsibility to enforce existing laws, but when they fail to meet that responsibility, we should not stand in the way of the states that take action to respond to the very real threat of border violence, drug cartels and human smuggling," he said in a written statement. "There's nowhere in the Constitution that says a state is limited to what it absolutely won't do and can be stopped for what it might do and to exercise a judgment against a state that has passed a law that is consistent with existing federal law is beyond absurd."
The volume of the protests will likely be turned down a few notches because of the ruling by Bolton, a Clinton appointee who suddenly became a crucial figure in the immigration debate when she was assigned the seven lawsuits filed against the Arizona law.
Lawyers for the state contend the law was a constitutionally sound attempt by Arizona -- the busiest illegal gateway into the country -- to assist federal immigration agents and lessen border woes such as the heavy costs for educating, jailing and providing health care for illegal immigrants.
Opponents argued the law will lead to racial profiling, conflict with federal immigration law and distract local police from fighting more serious crimes. The U.S. Justice Department, civil rights groups and a Phoenix police officer had asked the judge for an injunction to prevent the law from being enforced.
Localities inside Arizona were already preparing to interpret the law in different ways. The Tucson Unified School District's Governing Board approved by a 5-0 vote a policy Tuesday that maintains the district's stance of not enforcing immigration laws in the district's schools.
The hardest-line approach was expected in the Phoenix area, where Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio plans his 17th crime and immigration sweep. He planned to hold the sweep regardless of the ruling.
Arpaio, known for his tough stance against illegal immigration, plans to send out about 200 deputies and volunteers who will be looking for traffic violators, people wanted on criminal warrants and others. He has used that tactic before to arrest dozens of people, many of them illegal immigrants.
"We don't wait. We just do it," he said. "If there's a new law out, we're going to enforce it."
Elsewhere in the state, police officials were busy wrapping up training sessions this week. Many of the state's 15,000 police officers have been watching a DVD released this month that signs that might indicate a person is an illegal immigrant are speaking poor English, looking nervous or traveling in an overcrowded vehicle. It warned that race and ethnicity do not.
Some agencies added extra materials, including a test, a role-playing exercise or a question-and-answer session with prosecutors.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
New immigration bill puts local police on front line of border battle
http://www.azfamily.com/news/New-bill-puts-local-police-on-front-line-of-border-battle-90805259.html
Are republicans finally hearing us on immigration?
Are republicans finally hearing us on immigration?
Sunday, March 21, 2010
How to Fix Healthcare
First of all, most people fail to realize what's breaking our system right now. In the United States, anyone with or without insurance can go to a hospital emergency room and receive quality medical treatment. This includes illegal aliens. Sounds like everyone's getting health care to me! There are two major reasons health care costs are rising, and neither one of them is an "evil" insurance company.
The first is frivolous lawsuits. Insane amounts of money have been awarded for medical malpractice suits. The result is higher malpractice insurance premiums. Doctors didn't go to school for 10 years to be poor, they're going to pass the cost on to you, and who could blame them? TORT reform would stop this problem in it's tracks, and has done so in Texas. Of course, Democrats won't entertain this idea, because their lawyer buddies can't keep making a killing off of lawsuits.
Another alternative is to stop treating millions of illegal aliens for free. After all, we're paying higher prices so doctors and nurses don't go broke treating them for free! Once again, honest taxpayers pay the cost through increased health care pricing to cover the loss of treating illegal aliens for free. Now, I'm not heartless. If an illegal alien really needs treatment, we should oblige. Then, to be even nicer, we can give them a free ride home (deportation) to their homeland. That way, we can still treat these people if they really need it, but I don't think it's fair for taxpayers to subsidize in illegal aliens trip to the emergency room for a runny nose, and I'd bet we would see too many minor medical problems in a place they were never supposed to be: The EMERGENCY room.
Now, I'm sure some of you are thinking, surely these illegal aliens get handed a medical bill. You're right, they do. Who's going to make them pay it? It's not as if you can "ruin their credit" if they don't. It's kinda like ol' Barry Obama's idea to tax oil companies to punish them for their success. Ultimately, it will be a tax on oil consumers, because oil companies will just pass the cost of the tax on to us. They'll just consider it part of their overhead, and it won't affect their profit margin.
Of course, this is what happens when people who know absolutely nothing about running a business (government) start telling businesses how to run their business. These jack-holes have never made a payroll, never even been in charge of anything remotely profitable, but they know what's best.
Keep in mind that both TORT Reform and and enforcing immigration laws are a hell of a lot more constitutional than this garbage congress is trying to push through. With two thirds of the government willing to ignore and dismiss The Constitution, only the judicial will be able to save us from this government takeover of yet another sector of our economy.
Also, with 34 states already invoking the 10th amendment to opt-out of health care reform, a failure by the judicial branch to uphold The Constitution may even result in civil war. I could be wrong, perhaps Americans can tolerate totalitarian tyranny these days, but I recall from history class that we started this country to free ourselves from tyranny.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Neither Party Gets It, STILL!
Healthcare is easily taken care of, without any of the reforms the two parties. The reason our healthcare is in shambles and ridiculously over-burdened with costs is in plain sight in just about any emergency room. Illegal aliens know we'll provide medical attention to them for free at the emergency room. Now, I have no problem with providing them immediate medical attention, but if they can't produce documents explaining who they are or why they're here, they should be turned over to the border patrol. This will prevent our emergency rooms from having to endure huge crowds caused by people with a cough, or runny nose. Why shell out money, they'll do it for free at the emergency room. Like Michelle Obama says: “The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.” Michelle Obama. What the First Lady clearly doesn't realize is that is already happening, and that's the problem. Honest taxpaying citizens are having their wallets cyphoned for healthcare because let's face it, they need to make up the money somewhere. Poor people in this country have Medicaid, so what's the problem? I see a lot of blame being thrown at insurance companies, but we all know doctors don't come cheap, and insurance companies have to make payroll just like any other company, while still turning a profit. While the alternative ideas from Republicans looks promising, I don't see an answer for the huge money-pit in our emergency room. I suspect neither party is willing to tackle this because businesses utilize illegal immigrants constantly, alienating all businesses that thrive on cheap labor. At the same time, the name-calling Democratic Party will cry racism, and apparently Republicans think we're stupid enough to believe that garbage. There's nothing racist about giving illegal aliens free healthcare, and then asking them to leave. I don't care if they're here illegally from any country, any race, any religion. No exceptions, it's illegal, that's it. Pay your dues, get your green card, get your citizenship, and pay into the system that allows you to thrive and prosper so much more. You'll notice Americans treating you like you're one of them more and more. Now, it'd be nice if you'd learn English like ol' Teddy Roosevelt suggests in the quote below, but since we've not declared it our national language (much to my disappointment), I can only hope you're excited enough about being an american to learn it. I think everything else Teddy said rings true though.
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
"They're doin' the jobs the american people don't wanna do."
George W. Bush
There, I've given both sides now that I've quoted ol W.
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
"They're doin' the jobs the american people don't wanna do."
George W. Bush
There, I've given both sides now that I've quoted ol W.
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Undocumented resident to walk to D.C. to petition to be allowed to go to school in U.S.
Undocumented resident to walk to D.C. to petition to be allowed to go to school in U.S.
I suspect now that Obamacare is on the way, our beloved "leader" will turn his attention to amnesty for illegal aliens, thus making them eligible for Obamacare, and securing a "vote farm" of illegal aliens just as the Democrats have done with welfare.
I suspect now that Obamacare is on the way, our beloved "leader" will turn his attention to amnesty for illegal aliens, thus making them eligible for Obamacare, and securing a "vote farm" of illegal aliens just as the Democrats have done with welfare.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
