This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.
Posted on 09/28/2007 9:42:58 AM PDT by Dubya
CHAPARRAL, N.M. — It was 10:30 p.m. when a sheriff's deputy started banging on Maria's front door.
Startled, she came to the door and answered his demands to know who called 911. No one, said Maria, a 50-year-old illegal immigrant who asked that her last name not be published. But the deputy, whom she couldn't name, insisted he had to come in and look through the house.
Maria told the deputy to stay outside. But he barged in with relatives who came over to see what the commotion was about, she said. He searched the house without a warrant and questioned Maria and her relatives, including children, for nearly three hours.
Eventually, he left. But Maria was arrested in a traffic stop the next day when she couldn't produce a social security card during the stop.
"Now I'm afraid to call 911," Maria said, crying as she recalled her arrest.
The Otero County Sheriff's Department is routinely demanding proof of citizenship from residents either in traffic stops or at their homes, residents and their advocates say. The department has added extra patrols using a federal grant designed to help local authorities in border-area communities combat crime. More than a dozen people have been arrested and turned over to the U.S. Border Patrol since mid-August.
But civil rights advocates say deputies or police have no right to demand such identification and certainly no right to enter someone's home without a warrant or probable cause. An expert in immigration law called the Chaparral raids "bizarre" and a U.S. Border Patrol official said local authorities don't have immigration-enforcement powers.
"For any law enforcement officer to go in any home, they should do it legally, either through having a search warrant or by permission of the people inside the houses," said Fernando Garcia, executive director of the Border Network for Human Rights in El Paso. "In these cases, several times, the sheriff's didn't have a search warrant, a court order, or permission. There is a perception that the Constitution does not exist at the border. The sheriff actually has ignored basic constitutional rights."
Other local police agencies, including the El Paso County Sheriff's Office, have been accused of using similar tactics in the past.
In Panama City Beach, Fla., sheriff's deputies formed an Illegal Alien Task Force whose patrol cars parked at construction sites in force and arrested any worker who ran away.
Fifteen people in New York, including seven U.S. citizens, are suing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, claiming it violated the Fourth Amendment during home raids there in 2006.
Norbert Sanchez, undersheriff in Otero County, said he found it hard to believe that a deputy would spend three hours at a resident's house.
"There's no way a deputy would sit there for three hours," Sanchez said of his squad of 36 deputies who patrol 6,000 square miles of southern New Mexico. "They are usually going from one call to the next."
Irma, a 47-year-old woman who asked that her last name not be used, said a deputy came to her house when someone complained that her dog was loose and demanded proof of citizenship.
"They asked if I was in the United State legally," said Irma, who declined to tell a reporter her immigration status. "I had a valid ID, but they just asked for a social security card and said they would arrest me." After she signed a citation charging her $150 for the loose dog — which she says wasn't hers — the deputy left without arresting her.
Raul Hernandez said after he was pulled over for a traffic violation a deputy demanded that he show a social security card, even after he showed his driver's license.
Sanchez said deputies have patrolled Chaparral looking for scofflaws. He said they aren't trying to enforce federal immigration law, but they will call the Border Patrol if they believe someone is an illegal immigrant.
The extra patrols are funded under Operation Stonegarden, a federally funded border security initiative to help local agencies curb crime in border communities, Sanchez said.
"We don't enforce immigration laws, we enforce county and state statutes," Sanchez said. "We are not going down there targeting or profiling these people. We do the same operations in (other) parts of the county."
Sanchez said deputies have asked some residents for social security cards, but only as a means of identification.
But Kathleen Campbell Walker, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said social security cards are only a work authorization document, not a legally valid identification card.
And a Border Patrol spokesman in Washington said the deputies are not allowed to use Operation Stonegarden to seek out illegal immigrants.
Operation Stonegarden only allows local agencies to fund overtime shifts for routine operations, Assistant Chief Patrol Agent Ramon Rivera said.
"They have the right to stop and question someone's identity" when pursuing a criminal suspect, Rivera said, speaking in general about local authorties' rights. "They have the right to hold someone for the Border Patrol to help identify these people. Under Stonegarden, they have no immigration authority. We do not grant immigration authority to them."
Walker said immigration enforcement by local authorities isn't new or unusual, but typically, a local government will first pass a law aimed at rooting out illegal immigrants.
Chaparral and Otero County have no such laws, making the deputies' actions "bizarre," Walker said.
Sanchez said his deputies have done nothing wrong.
"What we do is verify that we are speaking to the right person," Sanchez said. "We're just down there enforcing the laws."
And if deputies have evidence that someone is an illegal immigrant, it is their duty to detain them and notify the Border Patrol, Sanchez said.
"We do detain illegal immigrants, for the simple fact that Border Patrol generally doesn't patrol Chaparral unless there are doing something over there," Sanchez said. "We call the Border Patrol and they generally send a unit down to meet with us."
The Border Network for Human Rights is handing out rights cards to residents in Chaparral and reminding them that they don't have to speak to police without a lawyer and deputies cannot come into their homes without permission or a warrant.
Hmmmm....
I thought I remember the Preamble to be "We the PEOPLE of the United States", which didn't really say "we the citizens" of the United States, either.
There seemed to be a lot of common sense applied to the wording (if I recall it correctly from long-ago school days), and the INTENT was to provide a form of Government for the NATION, where those who lived in the country, or wanted to, would be required to take an OATH to abide by it.
Maybe those who have interpreted the Constitution should AMEND it to say "We the foreigners who have sneaked into the United States for freebies at others' expense", or words to the effect of how it has been mis-interpreted and mis-used?
The "people" or "persons" arguments don't even pass the smell test, yet Lawyers have used activist Judges to twist the words to fit their interest or THEIR personal bias.
sorry, but I would be helping to round up the illegals....I know I would be able to keep my guns, and the second would probably not be suspended by declaring Martial Law, for to repel an invasion would demand America stay armed, unless hellery, or some other democrat was in office.
If that is the case why are there certain places in the Constitution and Bill of Rights that say "Citizen" and others that say "People?" Certainly, the Founding Fathers would not use two different words to mean the exact same thing.
This is not a crazy idea of mine but rather would the SCOTUS has stated for over 140 years.
I would not take that to the bank, no matter what Party was in power.
BTTT
However, no matter how many illegals stream across our borders this President will never see it as an invasion and thus never resort to Martial Law.
And yes, as soon as the illegals cross the border they are blessed with the very same Constitutional Protections as you and I.
If someone calls 911 officers are required to go to the residence where the call originated and make sure all is well. They usually do not simply take the word of whoever answers the door. This is all for good reason, in cases of domestic violence- it would be a bad situation if a injured/deceased victim was in a back room while the perpetrator simply sent LEO away by saying “all is well” at the door. This reasoning is what allowed the officer to look around the home after the 911 call.
As far as LEO checking for citizenship- if you are driving a vehicle you have to be able to produce ID upon being stopped. If you are unable to produce ID you will very likely be detained- no matter what your citizenship is. I would imagine she had no drivers license to prove her identity- so LE asked her for other ID- Social Security card- etc.
I read nothing here that would pertain to illegal search or LEO doing anything wrong or out of the ordinary. This article is simply an attempt to slant normal procedures into something else. What is really happening here is LEO in some areas are starting to apply the same procedures to everyone- not single anyone out. LEO in many places have been overlooking illegals violating laws that citizens have to comply with. Many LEOs have been told in the past to overlook it if a person they believed to be illegal could not show valid ID- drivers license- proof of insurance, etc- while NOT OVERLOOKING THE SAME THING WHEN CITIZENS ARE INVOLVED.
So I have to give up my sidearms (weapons) because the President of the United States has no declared an invasion is taking place? If you aren't a democrat, you talk or type like one.....
However, no matter how many illegals stream across our borders this President will never see it as an invasion and thus never resort to Martial Law.
LOL....now I can tell you....don't bank on it....
And yes, as soon as the illegals cross the border they are blessed with the very same Constitutional Protections as you and I.
Yes illegals are given equal protection just as criminal are given equal protection.....and make no mistake....illegals are viewed as criminals, as are those who aid and abet the illegals.
My only point is that under Martial Law, most likely all rights will be suspended.
LOL....now I can tell you....don't bank on it....
This is the very same President who is pushing Amnesty for Illegal Aliens. I don't imagine there will be much desire to declare Martial Law while Bush is attempting to force Amnesty for Illegals.
Yes illegals are given equal protection just as criminal are given equal protection.....and make no mistake....illegals are viewed as criminals, as are those who aid and abet the illegals.
And that is why you cannot go kicking in their front doors and searching their homes without a warrant.
The police screwed up in this case of that woman in New Mexico.
What party do you belong to again?
I’m not a legal expert, but my gut tells me no.
The Constitution protects criminals as well as those that abide by the law. It protects foreigners in the US as well as citizens.
The Constitution enumerates the powers of the government as well as limitations on that power. It does not say you can search someone's home and if you find out after the fact that they are they were there illegally, that makes it OK after the fact.
With the exception of foreign combatants, I can't think of any case where the courts have said that an alien, legal or illegal, does not have the same constitutional rights as a citizen.
So here’s a summons, Maria,
Hand it to your spouse.
Tell your kids you’re going away,
Gonna start a new life . . .
I’d think the Framers would not want the rights guaranteed in the Constitution applied to illegal aliens. However, the ACLU has a different take on things.
When someone calls 911 and just hangs up the phone without speaking, the dispatcher sends an officer to the house to investigate. The officer will insist on searching the home to find out if someone in the home called 911 and was prevented from speaking and might be held against their will.
The phone call to 911 creates probable cause for the search.
Notice how the article leave out if there actually was a call to 911. All it says was she denied it when the officer arrived. If the call was placed, even by a child playing with the phone, probable cause to search exists.
Best post in the whole damn thread.
This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.
That is just a simple fact and not my opinion.
BTT
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.