Posted on 06/02/2007 7:44:38 AM PDT by buccaneer81
Driver's license regulations are slanted against Latino immigrants Saturday, June 2, 2007 3:31 AM
Since the recent Dispatch article "Checkpoint for Latinos, not drunks, critics charge," responses to my criticism of the May 5 (Cinco de Mayo) checkpoints in Latino neighborhoods have included at least two letters to the editor (May 16 and 18) and a Dispatch editorial on May 14. The prevailing opinion appears to be that my condemnation of the checkpoint was off-target and that such checkpoints provide law enforcement with a useful tool for the citation of people who should not be on the road. I stand by my criticism of the checkpoint and wish to clarify the reasons behind it.
According to Carl Booth, Franklin County DUI Task Force coordinator, the checkpoint area was targeted because, "The officers were seeing a great rise in people with no license in that area." Excuse me, but that expressly tells me that the event was just what I suggested: a no-license checkpoint. The location of the checkpoint -- a neighborhood with heavy Latino representation, many without Ohio driver's licenses -- made it like shooting ducks in a barrel. Does that make it legally or morally wrong? I guess it depends on your point of view.
Courts consistently have held that police must have probable cause or, more accurately, "articulable suspicion" in order to stop your car and inquire as to your state of inebriation, licensing status or whatever. That's because the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that everyone has a right "to be secure in their persons . . . against unreasonable searches and seizures." Driving-under-the-influence checkpoints have been declared to fall outside of the Fourth Amendment because the checkpoints impose a small inconvenience relative to the great danger that drunken drivers impose on the roads. No-license checkpoints are another matter, however, and while not wholly illegal under all circumstances, their location within a Latino neighborhood does raise constitutional questions and certain moral challenges.
You see, prior to 1996, a driver's license in Ohio was just that: a license confirming a level of skill adequate to drive a car on the state's roads. In that year, much like today, illegal immigration was being heavily debated in Washington, and individual states pondered the question of states' rights to act independently from the federal government to control immigration. The U.S. Constitution prohibited that, so various states experimented with the denial of driver's licenses to those who could not confirm the status of their visas. Ohio's Bureau of Motor Vehicles, acting without legislative support, imposed such a standard, and its constitutionality was not challenged, in part because of the heavily politicized legal atmosphere.
However, demonstrating a high level of cynicism, the bureau exempted Canadians from the visa requirement, saying in effect that if you were from north of the border you were OK, but if you were from south of the border you were not. Apologists might be willing to perform moral and legal contortions justifying the distinctions, but I am not. The driver's-license provision taking away Ohio licenses from undocumented Latinos was a racist and intolerant measure.
Of course, the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001, changed everything. Federal and state governments found more than sufficient reason to revamp licensing requirements, but the reality of an undocumented community firmly imbedded in Ohio remains.
I do not believe that it's appropriate to drive without a license, as one of the letters to the editor suggests, but I also do not believe it is OK to target vulnerable populations when their vulnerability has been artificially crated by the state. My position has been and remains that it is imperative to find a way to license Ohio drivers without delving into their immigration status, as many states found a way to do and as many in law enforcement support. The recent announcement of a bipartisan immigration agreement in Washington promises to bring undocumented families out of the shadows and into the light of American freedom. That promises to solve the licensing problem for most such immigrants once and for all.
And as for DUI measures? I firmly support and call for more, not fewer, initiatives to prevent the endangering of our families. We need more education, more prevention and more effective law enforcement to ensure the safety of all residents of Franklin County.
JOSÉ LUIS MAS Chairman
Ohio Hispanic Coalition
Columbus
No mas, Senor Mas.
Now if we can just get ICE to check out the background of Mr. Mas....
L
No. it doesn't. They're breaking the law. IF they get caught, too bad.
Amazing, is it not, how liberals will twist and turn and back and fill? If you are driving without a license, isn’t that illegal? Is it not a good thing to get illegal drivers off the road before they hurt themselves or somebody else?
Am I missing something here?
he edited the 4th Amendment...
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I was on jury duty the week of 12/11/06 and one of my fellow jurors told me that her nephew was killed a year earlier by two illegals DRIVING their truck with FAULTY BRAKES to the BRAKE SHOP to be repaired when – surprise, surprise — the BRAKES FAILED AND THEY KILLED HER NEPHEW. I guess these MORONS thought they were back in Mexico where – in addition to driving DRUNK — they and their idiot friends do crap like that all the time. Can you say “Tijuana Taxi?” Can you say “TOW TRUCK?”
The driver got 4 years in prison and will be deported when he gets out.
Gotta wonder how long it will take him to sneak back in and kill someone else?
Estimates indicate they are killing around 25 American citizens each day, either with vehicles or via other criminal activity.
I can’t wait until the interstates start filling up with Mexican truckers on tight deadlines – and I do mean DEADlines – hurtling at carloads of unsuspecting native-born American citizens – all 387 of us.
Do you suppose this crap might stop if one of Bush’s daughters became a victim?
Of course, unlike the rest of us, they are driven to their endless round of parties by an armed SS detail, which eliminates the risk that they will be tempted to drive drunk themselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_zCpQZ-H94
One can only wonder how this clown feels about identity theft...particularly usin g the social security number of another to....well,you know.
Yeah, this guy is truly nutty.
He's a local attorney, but hey, they'll let anybody into this country these days.
Maybe they ought to take a hard look at his High School yearbook.
L
“the bureau exempted Canadians from the visa requirement”
*******************************
He is right you know.
Canadians, especially those Canadians that have abused the extremely lax immigration laws of Canada, should not be allowed a US state drivers license ANYWHERE without a background check.
If visitors with TB are not allowed into the country, why should we give legal papers to any virulent diseased person?
His "editing" does not alter what the Amendment says.
Even though the issue at the heart of this is one that we have strong opinions on, it is his opinion. For us to deny his right to express his opinion would be starting down the slippery slope to having our own rights denied.
What are they saying? That Scandinavian illegal aliens are somehow immune to those checkpoints?
Any Hispanics who might read this: I respect you a lot more when you have an English first name. Or English nickname. The JOSÉ LUIS MAS who wrote this compliant isn’t really an American. He is a squatter
There are exceptions but when you have no English name, but two, three or four Spanish ones I can tell you are a too much Hispanic and not enough American. Same goes for Chinese and others. I love it when I see a restaurant with the name “Danny Chung’s”. That’s how it should be. His real name might be Tsing-Ching but he has an English nickname to show respect for America and our Anglo/English traditions and culture
You are absolutely correct, a persons immigration status should have nothing to do with it.
Unfortunately, what we have in the u.S right now is about 30 million illegal aliens that are not participating in any form of immigration at all. They are criminal illegal aliens that did NOT attempt immigration, because swimming a river or jumping a fence in the middle of the night is NOT immigration.
Breaking the law can result in revocation of drivers license in many offences. Here in Texas you can loose your drivers license for buying a teenager a pack of cigarettes! It would seem to me that long term and repeated violation of Federal Alien Residency Status laws should at least carry the penalty as sneaking a teen a pack of smokes!
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.