Dear Mr. Christie:
Posted on 04/28/2008 12:52:01 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
DOVER, N.J. - New Jersey's top federal prosecutor told a Latino group that it is a civil offense — not a crime — for immigrants to live in the country without proper documentation.
In response to a question on illegal immigration at an open forum Sunday that grew heated, U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie said living in the United States without immigration paperwork is "an administrative matter" that federal immigration officials are supposed to address.
"Don't let people make you believe that that's a crime that the U.S. Attorney's Office should be doing something about," Christie was quoted as saying in The Star-Ledger of Newark for Monday editions. "It is not."
Christie told the audience it doesn't take a "genius" to see there's a serious immigration problem in this country and that the U.S. needs tighter border security. But he stressed that lacking immigration documents is not a crime unless the person was previously deported.
"If there are people out there committing crimes, they should be dealt with," he said. "If there are undocumented people running around, then Immigration and Customs Enforcement should do their jobs."
Critics quickly categorized Christie's remarks as soft on illegal immigration, a departure for the tough-on-crime prosecutor who is widely considered a leading Republican contender for the 2009 governor's race.
Christie, who was appointed by President Bush, made the remarks during a community forum organized by the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey.
A message left with Christie's office by The Associated Press on Monday was not immediately returned.
Edward Correa, a member of the Latino Leadership Alliance, said the dozens of people who attended Christie's speech had a mixed reaction to his comments.
In 2005, U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner introduced legislation to criminalize any undocumented status. Though the attempt was unsuccessful, it triggered massive pro-immigrant marches across the nation.
Christie, who was appointed by President Bush, made the remarks during a community forum organized by the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey.
Ping!
Christie needs to go back to law school.
“Entry without Inspection” (i.e. entering the country without going through a port of entry and being interviewed by an immigration officer) is a CRIMINAL offense.
An “overstay” is someone who entered with an inspection and then stayed over the authorized period of his visa - like most of the Irish illegals in Boston. Overstays are civil offenses.
All those people who snuck across the US border are CRIMINALS.
Is there any way to recall Christopher Christie? He sound like a buddy of Johnny Sutton.
Since Christie was appointed by Bush, its not surprising.
Also not surprizing was the presentation of anti American rhetoric at a METHODIST insitution. The Methodists are roght up there among the amensty granters and asylum keepers.
Christie probably wants to run for Governor. He can do it. He’s loaded financially. But this latest piece of idiocy as well as his recent problems with the Ashcroft issue may hurt him. Most of the people he spoke to were Democrats - Dover is a ‘Rat town, so its unlikely the cheering illegals are going to get him votes.
Entry without inspection is a misdemeanor offense, “and the offense is completed once an individual has entered the country.” This means that unless an individual is observed entering the country unlawfully, it is no longer prosecutable.
Importantly, that is the law as it now stands, so the NJ prosecutor is correct. The U.S. Attorney’s Office shouldn’t be doing anything unless they *can* do something. If it isn’t a prosecutable offense, they can’t prosecute.
Just like a cop on the street can’t arrest someone because someone else asks the cop to arrest them. “What did they do?”, asks the cop. “I saw them jaywalk here last week.”
However, just because the U.S. Attorney’s Office can’t do anything, doesn’t mean that ICE can’t do anything. So they are the ones to talk to.
And more importantly, the law can be changed so the US Attorney’s Office *can* do something.
(a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection; misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who
(1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or
(2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or
(3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
And stealing Ientities or presenting false documents to get a job IS????????????????????????????
I agree that "the offense is completed once an individual has entered the country" but disagree that "unless an individual is observed entering the country unlawfully, it is no longer prosecutable."
The criminal offense has been committed when the illegal alien enters the country. Absent teleportation technology, the fact that the illegal alien is in the country without documentation is pretty damned good evidence that the criminal offense occurred.
Police do not have to witness a crime to arrest a criminal. No one has to witness a crime to arrest a criminal. It is a matter of evidence.
Title 8 USC 1325 can be prosecuted even if the actual entry was not observed.
Such prosecutions don’t occur because the law is insufficient. Some of the border States reject arrest for illegal entry, and interior States reject it because the border States reject it. The US Attorneys reject the law because it could fill up our federal prisons overnight with petty offenders.
Right now there are several efforts underway to create a better law. One is to increase the maximum penalty from six months and a fine to a year and a fine.
But the only *sufficient* laws are for human trafficking and if individuals *deported* from the US attempt reentry. Those are both severe felonies.
Therefore, the emphasis has been on kicking illegals back across the border, if not deporting them officially. This is preferable to putting several million petty offenders in prison.
But the bottom line is to build the fence, now. And starting from the half dozen most frequently used crossing areas, not from the nearly impassible desert areas.
Section 1324a states: “Any person who knowingly hires/harbors/transports any illegal alien is guilty of a felony punishable by 10 years jail + $2000 fine per illegal alien + forfeiture of the vehicle or property used to commit the crime”.
Border states, interior states, or any state for that matter do not have any say in whether illegal aliens are prosecuted for illegal entry. The fact is 8 USC 1325 is a federal criminal offense that is prosecutable whenever the United States Attorneys see fit. Which they are doing in Border Patrol Sectors in Arizona, Texas and soon California.
Just because that’s the way they do it in France, Polandn and Mexico,,,,,,,,,,
Bttt!
Sorry, but you are wrong.
Entry without inspection, by definition, is not an “observed” offense. It is a provable offense, during and after the fact, and thus prosecutable. The law provides penalties for the offense, to wit:
8USC 1325 - shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Perhaps The Decider is keeping a close eye on him.
Dear Mr. Christie:
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.