Posted on 01/08/2005 11:54:30 PM PST by NewRomeTacitus
Sen. Spector (in opening statements): "The department will have a major role in implementing President Bush's proposals to revise our nation's immigration laws and to deal with the 10 million aliens who are in this country illegally."
"The attorney general has exercised the authority to overrule conclusions by the immigration judge and a board of immigration appeals. And this is an issue that lingers after considerable questioning of Attorney General Ashcroft as to what standards ought to be used. And the attorney general, John Ashcroft, conceded before this committee that it's not sufficient to simply cite national security. And that will be a question which we will want to inquire into."
(Way later after Sen. Leahy dredged up the torture allegations every chance possible.)
Sen. Kennedy: "One is the -- which we talked about -- the state and local law enforcement of immigration laws. You’re familiar with this. In 2002 the Department of Justice reversed long-standing policies -- supported the inherent authority of states to enforce federal immigration laws, and this -- that reversal was based on an Office of Legal Counsel opinion that’s not been made public. And I’ve asked for a copy of the opinions; so have others of the Congress; interested parties have asked for it too. The refusal to -- it’s been the subject of a lawsuit. The department’s response failed to provide the opinion but simply offered its conclusion without any discussion.
I have difficulty finding a good reason why the department continues to keep the opinion and its legal analysis secret, especially since it reverses a long-standing policy that scores of police chiefs, police departments around the country, including many in your home state of Texas, have denounced the idea of involving state and local police in federal immigration enforcement. Last month the International Association of Chiefs of Police issued a report expressing concern. They and others believe it will destroy the remarkable progress they’ve made with community policing in which police have worked closely with the public, including immigrant communities, and developed productive bonds of trust -- concerns raised by law enforcement shared by many conservative and security experts. I can’t believe I’m quoting Grover Norquist -- Bob Barr, the Heritage Foundation all say this could be an unmanageable burden on the law enforcement officials."
So could you tell us why -- quickly as you could -- the secrecy, and can you tell us whether you’d support them releasing the OLC opinion on the authority to --"
MR. GONZALES: "Senator, thank you for that question. You and I did talk about that in your office. This matter is in litigation, as you indicated; there is FOIA litigation about the release of the memo. The conclusions are known. It’s the analysis, the deliberations that went into the opinion that I think the department is seeking to protect.
Let me just emphasize, though, or try to provide reassurance about this.
There is no requirement, of course, upon state and locals to enforce federal immigration laws. This is purely voluntary. In fact, of course, some states have prohibitions; they couldn’t do it even if they wanted to. In some cases the department, as I understand it, has entered into with state or local departments, in terms of memorandums of understanding in order to enforce this. We’re certainly -- I certainly am sensitive to the notion that some local law enforcement people don’t want to exercise this authority. Well, we’re not saying that they have to. But if they want to and they can assist in fighting the war on terror, that’s what this opinion allows us to do.
Personally, I would worry about a policy that permits someone, a local law enforcement official, to use this authority somehow as a club to harass -- they might be undocumented aliens, but otherwise lawful citizens. That would be troubling. That would be troubling to the president who, as a governor of a -- former governor of a border state understands and appreciates the roles that immigrants and undocumented aliens play in our society.
But it is in litigation, and it would probably be better if I didn’t speak more about that."
GW is real conservatism. He's as best as you are ever going to get. He is not his father. He is in fact continuing the Reagan agenda, and doing an excellent job of it.
You must not have been around politically aware during the first Reagan term. You have no idea how much infighting there was between the "we" and "they".
Try imagining if GW had picked McCain as his running mate, then named McCain's campaign chairman to head up his transition team and serve as Chief of Staff. Imagine if the word was sent down that no Christian Right activists need apply for positions in the new administration.
You have no idea how lucky you are to have GW as president. And unless we can keep a large percentage of the Hispanic vote, he may be the last Republican president you'll see in your lifetime.
BTTT
Fat-frog Kennedy says, "I can’t believe I’m quoting Grover Norquist -- Bob Barr, the Heritage Foundation all say this could be an unmanageable burden on the law enforcement officials."
RNC: you better take note here.
Gonzales says, "...they might be undocumented aliens, but otherwise lawful citizens."
otherwise lawful citizens. Nevermind all you'd (*Gonzales & sympathizers) have to do is a simple search right here on FR to discover the effect these illegal alien invaders are having on the true US citizenery. But c-i-t-i-z-e-n-s... of... where?????
Projectile barf.
Thanks for the ping! Bump!
I'm way ahead of you.
No he's not, he defines convenientism more than anything. His relationships with Mexican elitists holding outstanding influence in that country has been well documented. Never mind that some of his former business partners are now on Most Wanted lists.
My problem with the President of the the United States lies in my belief that the law should applied to everyone equally. I've seen illegal aliens recieve exceptions and special considerations Americans wouldn't get. That's flat-out wrong. He constantly says that family values don't stop at the Rio Grande. What he really seems to be proposing is a twisted form of racism against the caucasions who carried democracy to this point of time for the sake of a select group of profiteers.
I'd love to be wrong on that and my belief that powerful forces are edging us to a world government. It's happening now and we have to fight for our founders vision. Where are you on that one? I say that the Rule of Law doesn't stop for any Party's convenience. You can try to change the law to favor the hypercaptalists trying to hoard all real financial resources while continued existance requires continual movement of the financial stream. Without that movement wealth becomes meaningless as all of society suffers. In short, no one will ever be on top of the hill, only the last up there to die of deprivation.
I'm pleased you are aware of the situation. If their is anything I can do to assist you, do not hesitate to let me know how.
LOL
C-SPAN rebroadcast the confirmation hearings a bit earlier. The exchange between Kennedy and Gonzales was editted out...what an amazing coincidence.
I have to agree with bayurod on this one in this sense: We need to work on our local officials to use the authority they have to arrest illegals.
Of course, I'd like to see the feds withhold funds fed funds from districts that do not enforce these laws.
Remember when the feds threatened states with loss of highway funds if they didn't comply with the 55 mph speed limit? The same sort of thing could be done with funds for schools etc...
:~)
Otherwise.......key word in the reading process. Try again
You are either an alien or a citizen, there is no other alternative, and you can't be both. You can't be an alien and "otherwise" a citizen. And, none of this changes if you put modifiers before the nouns.
Never to be broadcast again, I'd bet.
Yep. Wondering if it got redacted from the transcripts as well.
Yes, US citizen was implied. Gonazles is seeking to be Attorney Generel of the US, not of the world. If citizen of the world is what he was referring to, then let him pursue a job at the UN. Besides, citizen of the world is a loose term with no real meaning.
Synonyms: citizen, national, subject
These nouns denote a person owing allegiance to a nation or state and entitled to its protection: an American citizen; a British national; a French subject.
**Odd, you chose FDR's One World Odor definition of citizen.
LOL! I thought that was coming from the hamper.
In a poll in a recent issue of the Hispanic Poder magazine, a majority of readers came out in favor of tighter enforcement of immigration laws.
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.