Illegal immigrant wins back pay but faces deportation

AP on Bakersfield Californian ^ | 5/11/06 | AP

[muawiyah]

Yup ~ to start with the Queen of England is free to file suit in our courts.

One of the benefits of a successful revolution you know.

[muawiyah]

In most countries foreigners are free to file suit about all sorts of matters. Otherwise NO ONE WOULD INVEST IN THOSE COUNTRIES.

[muawiyah]

Workman's comp is one of those deals worked out decades ago to avoid tieing up the courts with lawsuits over bandaids (among other things).

No reason that system can't work irrespective of the status of the worker.

[Antoninus II]

Not only should she not have gotten back pay, all their assets in the US should be forfeit as ill gotten gains from being here illegally

Exactly!! The employer should still have to pay the back wages, but to ICE. All assets of these illegal invaders should be siezed.

[P-40]

legal Americans are more expensive to hire.

Hiring Americans means that the employer has to pay the costs. Hiring illegals means the taxpayer gets to pay a large portion of the costs.

[KC_Conspirator]

Sure, I am for even more punishment under the law.

[Gondring]

In most countries foreigners are free to file suit about all sorts of matters. Otherwise NO ONE WOULD INVEST IN THOSE COUNTRIES.

Yet using the court system to recover ill-gotten gains is not the usual intent of such systems.

[muawiyah]

The "gains" are not, as it were, "ill gotten". Remember, the 13th Amendment prohibits slavery. Slavery is prohibited here even if you are a foreign owned slave. You will find that most cases of slavery in the United States these days usually involve foreigners from the Middle East, the Far East or Latin America who literally hold someone captive and do not pay them a wage.

Our system must not be allowed to reward slavery.

[Gondring]

Are you serious?! What a twisted definition you use!

Both participants in this case were acting illegally. "Our system must not be allowed to reward ..." does not mean "Our system must protect criminal endeavours and participants..."

In other words, your argument would mean that if a drug deal goes wrong, the courts should help someone recover money...since "Our system must not be allowed to reward (theft, fraud, whatever.)." And I guess you'd like consumer protections added for illegal drug use, too?

[muawiyah]

Drug deals are felonies. Being here without a visa is a misdemeanor.

In any case, contracts are sacrosanct and if you hire a man you must pay him the agreed sum ~

I am astounding that ANYONE on FR would seek a way out of a deal bound by solemn oath and hoary tradition.

[Gondring]

In any case, contracts are sacrosanct and if you hire a man you must pay him the agreed sum ~

Wouldn't want a hitman to go unpaid, after all!

You're forgetting that the employer and employee conspired to defraud the government. To call fraudulent agreement a "sacrosanct contract" seems to be sacriligious!*

Drug deals are felonies. Being here without a visa is a misdemeanor.

Sorry, but the concept applies for any crime...even for schoolchildren...

TIMMY: Teacher, Teacher...Johnny told me that if I stole Billy's lunch money from his desk, he'd give me half of what I got!

MUAWIYAH: Now Johnny...give Timmy the money. Don't you know that contracts are sacrosanct? And if you don't pay Timmy, you're guilty of SLAVERY!

I am astounding that ANYONE on FR would seek a way out of a deal bound by solemn oath and hoary tradition.

What tradition? You mean "there's no honor among thieves?" They should keep the contract, but it's not appropriate for the court to be involving itself in blatantly criminal transactions.

*Off-topic, yet interesting note.... "Sacriligious" and "religious" do not share the same etymological root. Sacriligious gets its ending from "legere" (to steal). Disclaimer: IANAL (I am not a linguist!)

[muawiyah]

All crimes are not equal, nor are all punishments.

Until you come to an understanding of those differences, there's no sense in even attempting to discuss the application of the 13th Amendment with you.

[Gondring]

I guess you haven't yet learned to read.

[muawiyah]

Go ahead and prosecute the illegal and the employer for conspiracy to defraud ~ that way you can inflict a civil punishment of "x $" on a penniless illegal.

Much better to make sure he's paid by the employer, and then the employer prosecuted to the point where his belongings are sold at public auction, he is imprisoned, and his family driven to the welfare office.

The illegal should also be sent home.