Posted on 09/25/2004 8:16:20 AM PDT by MarlboroRed
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill on Friday that would have allowed legal residents and U.S. citizens of Mexican descent to file for damages decades after being deported during in a Depression-era program to free up jobs.
While expressing sympathy toward those involuntarily returned to Mexico from California between 1929 and 1944, the Republican governor said the victims had had time to pursue legal action before the statute of limitations ran out.
Schwarzenegger added that allowing claims until 2006 could burden the courts with thousands of cases and result in increased costs to state and local governments. He suggested a less costly alternative could be a legislature-approved reparations fund.
``If the legislature should decide, as a matter of public policy, to provide compensation, a reparations fund should be created to expedite the processing of these claims,'' the governor wrote. ``This would be an efficient and less expensive method for both taxpayers and the plaintiffs.''
The ``Mexican Repatriation'' took place during the Great Depression when the U.S. government searched for ways to ease economic hardship and make more jobs available.
More than 500,000 Mexicans and Mexican-Americans, including many U.S.-born American citizens, were forced to leave their homes in areas with large Hispanic populations, such as California and Texas.
The California measure would have given those who were U.S. citizens or legal residents and their heirs until Dec. 31, 2006, to make claims for damages in California courts.
It really does say, however, how weak we've gotten. These deporations were done under FDR and later similar deportations would be done under Eisenhower, a Democrat and a Republican. Back then this country understood that a nation that cannot control its borders is on a path to destruction.
The weakness you refer to really results from sickness. The Anglo appears to be sick and needs therapy.
Well, regardless of any "sympathies," thank goodness we have a Republican governor who stops silliness like this.
Without illegal immigration, CA suffered a net population LOSS from 1990 to 2000. Most middle-class people simply want out.
AZTLAN is not far away.
But the aritcle suggests he would support a "reparations fund".
When will Americans try to get reparations from the Mexican government which confiscated the homes the Americans had built or purchased with their own money in Mexico --- but the Mexican government took them away from them --- and never paid them?
Yes, that's a bummer. There's not a lot of good one can say about California politics right now. I applaud any small signs of sanity - there aren't many.
We should do that again.
Mexico's elites support the invasion of the US because without it they'd all be strung up. Why our elites should care whether they get strung up continues to baffle.
And the garbage about Mexicans doing the jobs Americans won't is complete nonsense. First, our agricultural system is at least a decade behind the rest of the Western world because of our reliance on manual labor. Second, American lower class would gladly do the so-called dirty jobs now done by Mexicans if the pay was above slave-wage. Finally, as has been made clear over and over, the net LOSS to our economy in terms of health, education, crime, etc., is many greater than any contribution by illegals.
Neither party has the guts to do it again. Even Asa Hutchinson acknowledged as much. Our borders are completely out-of-control.
Yep.
That's just it --- they're extremely wealthy --- but they'd be fleeing when the revolution breaks out --- they're only in Mexico to take it's wealth.
Wait until we have to either deport foreign born Muslims or intern them...if attacks here take place and collusion/glee is apparent. Not so farfetched as it would seem. Many of the Japanese who were interned during WWll were spying for Japan, some from conviction, some to protect relatives back in Japan. This is widely ignored. Not PC, of course.
Nevertheless, the Constitution clearly defines those born in the USA as US citizens. They cannot legally be deported without completely disregarding the law of the land.
No it doesn't what do you think the phrase, "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" means in the 14th amendment? According to your logic the children of foreign diplomats born in the US are US citizens. They most definitely not considered US citizens, because they are subject to the jurisdiction of a foreign country.
Amendment XIVB
1. 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.2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.
3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.
5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Try the link below for an interesting discussion of how the 14th Amendment has been misinterpreted:
http://www.fairus.org/ImmigrationIssueCenters/ImmigrationIssueCenters.cfm?ID=1190&c=13
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.