Posted on 02/19/2018 8:23:40 AM PST by ptsal
In the aftermath of the passage of legislation aimed at limiting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in California, the state has released rules employers must follow or risk fines of up to $10,000 per offense.
The Immigrant Worker Protection Act prohibits employers from voluntarily granting ICE agents access to private areas of worksites or to employee records. If ICE agents have a judicial warrant or subpoena for the records, however, the state law allows employers to grant them access, according to guidelines released by California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
Under the new state law, employers must also notify employees of record inspections that federal immigration agents are conducting within 72 hours of receiving a notice of inspection. Likewise, employers are prohibited from reverifying workers’ employment eligibility at a time or in a manner that is not required by federal immigration law.
Employers can be fined up to $10,000 for not complying with eligibility reverification provision. Violations of other provisions of the law can result in fines of $2,000 to $5,000 for the first offense and $5,000 to $10,000 for subsequent offenses.
“The advisory and guidance released today are important tools to help workers and employers feel more secure, by educating them about their rights and responsibilities under the law,” Becerra said in a statement. “Everyone has an obligation to follow the law, whether it’s the Constitution, federal or state law. AB 450 works in concert, not in conflict, with our Constitution and federal laws.”
Assemblyman David Chiu (D-San Francisco), the author of the legislation, also released a statement on the new rules.
“No one should have to go to work every day scared of the threat of deportation,” Chiu said. “AB 450 was meant to not only give protections to California workers but also to ensure employers know what to do if immigration officials visit their workplaces.”
State law mandating obstruction of justice in a federal law enforcement case. Marijuana laws for the feds are next. Once the nose is under the tent if this sticks the floodgates of lawlessness and rouge state activities will pour in. (Like a 2nd amendment override. Entire Constitution and Bill of Rights override)
Thinking twice won’t help either. If someone has the documentation and are qualified you can find yourself in trouble there too.
Passing a law that mandates breaking the law. Those who pass and sign the law are criminals. Indisputable.
“The question is, should the residents rise up and overthrow the revolutionary government??”
We would but we may not have .50 cal or assault weapons, or mags over 10 rounds.
Keep circling the toilet bowl, Kalifornia!!
He's been the "do nothing" AG since appointed.
If Trump doesn't replace him, and SOON, he's going to take Trump down because of Trump letting him stay on as AG.
The Constitution grants Congress broad authority to regulate federal elections. While Congress has typically deferred to the states, Congress does have ample authority in this area. Article Four of the Constitution also provides that the federal government shall guarantee that all states have a republican form of government. Chuck Schumer and the Democrats will of course filibuster any attempt to stop California from extending the franchise to millions of people from Mexico and Central America. So the crisis seems unavoidable unless a court intervenes.
Congress probably needs to define an iron-clad system for validating citizenship as well as a strong voter-ID regime, and then provide that no states' votes for president or Members of Congress are valid unless the states meet the standard. California can revert to territory status. Or secede. At this point, I don't much care which. If California wants to secede, make it a county option process. There is no reason that the whole state has to be one thing or the other. California was created from federal lands taken by treaty after the Mexican War. The federal writ precedes the creation of the state.
Where are Gene Robinson et al who declared that any talk of states rights under Obama (health care, guns, etc.) was a) racist (because we all want slavery restored, he thinks) and b) treasonous?
It must be lanced -- even if by San Andreas...
If they're legal, why would they be worrying daily about deportation?
Maybe State side ‘legal’ but Federal side illegal.
Simple solution, let CA do their “thing” and have the Feds warn the employers “go ahead, make our day”... which law do you wish to disobey, Local/State OR FEDERAL.
And make the Federal fine uninhabitable!
Placer County is Not Liberal! Can you say Rep tom McClintock!
That’s a good point. Risk pissing off ice agents and making them come back with warrants, or pay 10k fines to the state.
Knowing that most employers care more about lowering their labor costs, they’ll be happy to take the chance though... until.... Ice starts showing up repeatedly. If I was the head of ICE, I’d put the pressure on these employers. See if they crack.
Refuse to accept their POTUS electors, Senators and Congressmen. Dems will never WIN another one.
I don’t agree with you one bit. I’m not willing to cede the entire left coast of this country to these lunatics, so they can hurry up and let our enemies in. What sane nation allows that much real estate, bordering the ocean, no less, to operate as it’s own country?
I truly don’t understand folks who think this way?
But he's so SLEEEEPPPPYYYYYY
No, they care about it selectively. When the feral goobermint is shoving some illegitimate marxist crap down the people's throats, they're all over it then.
Oh, and they should go one step further:
If they are going to prosecute employers for following Federal immigration law, they need to start prosecuting employers for seizing wages and submitting withholding to the Federal government.
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.