Towns struggling with flow of illegals, Laws are often challenged, and defeated in the courts

Star Ledger ^ | 12.10.06 | BRIAN DONOHUE

[Coleus]

With Congress deadlocked over how to handle illegal immigration, a growing number of towns and cities are taking matters into their own hands, using local laws to crack down on the problems associated with a massive underground population. In New Jersey, some towns have toughened traffic laws to deter contractors from picking up day laborers on city streets. Others have tried to ban workers from gathering on street corners to wait for work. Several have launched housing code crackdowns to combat overcrowding. One has banned illegal immigrants from renting apartments altogether.

And few, are having much success. In a growing number of towns, local crackdowns are faltering amid court challenges, political opposition or other hurdles.

Consider:

The Borough of Bound Brook launched a series of housing raids to address rampant overcrowding in homes rented mostly by Latino immigrants in the late 1990s. But the U.S. Justice Department sued the town for illegally targeting Hispanics, resulting in a 2004 consent decree requiring the town to repay victims $425,000, hire a bilingual housing coordinator and make changes to its housing and zoning practices.

Freehold Borough's housing crackdown and an effort to shut down a laborer gathering area were challenged in a lawsuit filed by immigrant rights groups. In a settlement last month, the borough agreed to pay $278,000, change its inspection procedures and allow laborers to gather on public property.

In July, the Township of Riverside in Burlington County passed a law fining employers and landlords who hire or rent apartments to illegal immigrants. In local elections last month, the Republican mayor and council member who pushed the measure were swept from office. With legal fees mounting from a pair of lawsuits challenging the law, Mayor Charles Hilton -- the man who proposed the law -- is calling for its repeal.

[jpsb]

bump

[marty60]

Well if they manage to stay in the US for 18 months working on someone elses SS #. They get full Social Security retirement at the taxpayers expense. And now with the dumofascist in charge the American Taxpayers will be hosed even worse.

[winodog]

In my humble opinion the size of the hosing wont change much no matter who is in charge.

[BohDaThone]

what's your basis for saying that if "They" (legal or illegal) work 18 months they get "full social security retirement." AFAIK, any SS retirement requires at least 40 quarters (10 years of work). Also, if it's someone else's number, how can they claim it as theirs? -- Wouldn't the unknowing number holder get the benefit??

[jpsb]

You are behind the times, only US citizens need work 10 years, illegal need (or soon will need) 1.5 years.

[Political Junkie Too]

In July, the Township of Riverside in Burlington County passed a law fining employers and landlords who hire or rent apartments to illegal immigrants. In local elections last month, the Republican mayor and council member who pushed the measure were swept from office.

I wonder who it was that did the sweeping. Was the local citizenry sufficiently sympathetic to illegal alien causes, or was the "underground" population-at-large allowed to vote?

-PJ

[JerseyJohn61]

bump

[panthermom]

You really need to check out the news from the past few days.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1762391/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1760916/posts

If possible take a valium or something first, let it settle you down before you read it. Otherwise, you might stroke out.

[BohDaThone]

based on your posts and sources, it is clear that:

1. "social security for illegals who have worked for 18 months with someone else's SSN" isn't law, and isn't in effect.

2. What the alleged agreement ("awaiting Bush's signature" (since 1994!) really means, or if it even exists, will await further research, IMHO. Usually, when a group breathlessly announces that they have uncovered something that was been secretly agreed to years ago by mysterious forces, there is a lot less there than meets the eye.

But, I am willing to research further.

[BohDaThone]

Here is the link to the Q&A prepared by the (Republican-Controlled) House Ways and Means Committee in 2005 on "totalization" of social security benefits with Mexico.

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/media/pdf/ss/qandamexico.pdf

It confirms that there is an agreement that MAY be submitted to Congress -- but that is not in effect. It refutes a lot of the rhetoric above. It's not "Full" ; It's not for illegals; It is reciprocal.

Maybe it's a good idea; maybe it's not. Maybe the committe is right; maybe it's not. But let's argue based on the facts as they come out, not casually toss out that it is in effect, with the most exaggerated interpretations.

That said, one of the interesting things in the Q & A is that the "one-house veto" provision to which the agreement would be subject has been struck down by the Supreme Court in other contexts (INS v. Chadha), Whether that means that the whole process would be unconstitutional without affirmative legislation would seem to be an open question.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Bunch of whiners. You've already lost your country. A lot of talk and no action, so, give it up.

[ChildOfThe60s]

The criminal judiciary. I point that out to every foolish Republican that sits out an election with the notion that there is no difference between Pubbies and Dems.

Liberal judges, the gift that keeps on giving.....for life.

[marty60]

It will not help your pocket book to stick your head in the sand. Just search illegal+Social Security and read. This bill was passed in May of 06 BTW.

[BohDaThone]

Please rad item 12. If "it was passed in May of 06" give bill number and text

[marty60]

I'm sure you already know it.

[BohDaThone]

That's not much of an argument. Even the most alarmist threads and posts on this subject seem to agree, once you drill down, that this "agreement" was to be submitted to Congress after the 2006 elections and that it would not take effect until Congress acted or, at a minimum, failed to act for 90 days. So, I really do want to know -- What do you think took effect in May of last year?? And what is your source?

[deport]

A couple of stories with some explaination of the votes in 06.... bits and pieces become fact after awhile.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/socialsecurity.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/petition.asp

[marty60]

You must be a mole from the Mexican Government. They get to keep ALL SS money paid into their system when the illegals were actually working in MX.

[EDINVA]

"Wouldn't the unknowing number holder get the benefit??"

I sure HOPE so !!! Someone in CT has been working on MY Social Security number. And building my credit, too ... found out from BoA that I have an account or two more than *I* applied for.

Ain't it great ?