El Ping...
EXCERPT The Supreme Court on Thursday, may have just written the epitaph for the Illegal Alien in the United States. Not so surprisingly, the justices voted straight down party lines for a 5-3 decision......In effect, the Supreme Court ruled, Arizona is within its rights to require employers to check the citizenship status of workers through a government data base.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sued Arizona over the law, maintaining that immigration enforcement is a purview of the federal government. In 1986, a sweeping immigration law reform, removed the rights of states to enforce immigration law; except for one clause, that allows states to enforce immigration law in accordance with: “all licenses necessary to operate the business.”
Chief Justice Roberts wrote the main opinion for the court, which will leave the door open for states to end the illegal alien invasion: “We hold that Arizona’s licensing law falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states and therefore is not expressly preempted.” “no basis in law, fact, or logic” for the argument that Arizona should be stopped from doing so in the name of federal “preemption” of state activity.
Other states are following Arizona's example and considering requiring all employers to enroll in the Homeland Security Department's voluntary E-Verify program, which compares employees' names and Social Security numbers with government data bases. Georgia has just recently enacted this type of law. A federal version of E-Verify will soon be introduced by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-TX. more at floppingaces.net...
=================================
USSC DECISION FITS IN GREAT WITH THIS INITIATIVE Here's the way to proceed against illegals.
In 1996, Congress expanded the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to include violations of federal immigration law.
1 While this expansion may not have received much publicity, it could potentially change the face of U.S. immigration law enforcement. Under the new RICO provisions, a violation of certain provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) meets the definition of racketeering activity, also known as a "predicate offense,"
2 and an entity that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity for financial gain can be held both criminally and civilly liable.
3 Among other things, the INA makes it unlawful to encourage illegal immigration or employ illegal aliens,
4 which violations were included as predicate offenses under RICO.
The 1996 law changes in the INA made hiring illegal aliens a predicate act of racketeering activity under RICO, but illegal hiring wasn’t the only violation of the INA made a predicate act. Other INA prohibitions made RICO predicate acts were encouraging or inducing illegal immigration, smuggling, and harboring illegal aliens.10 Together, these additions make the RICO Act potentially a very strong new tool in the hands of private parties against persons and companies that profit by violating U.S. immigration law.
Additionally, the RICO provision regarding the unlawful encouragement of illegal immigration could justify a suit against a private entity, such as a bank, that accepts foreign-issued identification cards that are only needed by illegal aliens.
One example of this, of course, is the matricula consular issued by the Mexican consulates in the United States. Since both the supporters of the matricula and those who oppose its acceptance agree that only illegal aliens have need to rely on the card, acceptance of the card knowingly encourages illegal immigration. Part of the legislative intent of the RICO laws in general was to afford private citizens a remedy for lawbreaking when authorities normally charged with such enforcement became derelict in their duties.
For example, in a town in which political corruption and racketeering activity have combined to the detriment of law-abiding citizens and the rule of law, the RICO Act was intended to provide private citizens the ability to initiate court action to compel enforcement and respect for the law.
Remember when I said that if the shlups thought passing a balanced budget was hard this time...Wait till next session...
Revenue WILL be less than it was this time, and the cuts will be deeper due to that reduced income...
I have to wonder why anyone thought that an immigration bill would even be scheduled for a special session, the governor already set the agenda to handle fiscal and feduciary issues...Not anything like this...
But hey...Who knows at this point...
Maybe they’ll try to sneek in some reasurecting line in the bills about the Trans Texas Corridor...hehehe
That’ll pizz off a lot of people...
Viva La Migre!!!