Guest greg3347 Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 On Oct 11, 10:20 am, bigTITS <clitte...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Sorry, folks. But a federal judge has blocked your Nincompoop-In- > Chief's effort to stop the hiring of ILLEGALS. > > We may not like it, but we'll have to face it sooner -- or LATER. > Whatever number of illegals are here at this time will be granted a > path to legal citizenship. By federal law. > > This might take 5, 10, 15 years, but the shear numbers of illegals in > the U.S. precludes any and all of your wild ideas for "getting rid of > them." > > AND IF CONGRESS and your White House war criminal don't pass an > immigration reform bill in the fairly near future, the COURTS will > intervene and "institute" reform by negating and gutting more federal > and local anti-immigrant "laws." > > SO -- shout, scream, jump-up-and-down, pull your hair, curse your > politicians, commit hate crimes, threaten "action" of some kind -- but > sooner or later some form of AMNESTY will become the law of the land, > like Brown vs. Board of Education. > > Your federal government helped create this problem through decades of > indifference and neglect. > > And soon your federal government will correct the problem, too. > > ---------------------- > > "Effort to Curb Illegal Workers' Hiring Blocked" > > By Spencer S. Hsu > Washington Post Staff Writer > Thursday, October 11, 2007; A01 > > A federal judge barred the Bush administration yesterday from > launching a planned crackdown on U.S. companies that employ illegal > immigrants, warning of its potentially "staggering" impact on law- > abiding workers and companies. > In a firm rebuke of the White House, U.S. District Judge Charles R. > Breyer of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction against the > president's plan to press employers to fire as many as 8.7 million > workers with suspect Social Security numbers, starting this fall. > > President Bush made the effort the centerpiece of a re-energized > enforcement drive against illegal immigration in August after the > Senate rejected his proposal to overhaul immigration laws. But the > court ruling -- sought by major American labor, business and farm > organizations -- highlighted the chasm that the issue has opened > between the Republican Party and its traditional business allies. > > The case also called attention to the gulf between Washington rhetoric > about the need to curtail illegal immigration and the economic reality > that many U.S. employers rely on illegal labor, as well as to the > government's inability for nearly three decades to develop adequate > tools for identifying undocumented workers. > > In a 22-page ruling, Breyer said the plaintiffs -- an unusual > coalition that included the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties > Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- had raised serious questions > about the legality of the administration's plan to mail Social > Security "no-match" letters to 140,000 U.S. employers. > > "There can be no doubt that the effects of the rule's implementation > will be severe," Breyer wrote, resulting in "irreparable harm to > innocent workers and employers." > > The government letters are intended to warn employers for the first > time that they must resolve questions about their employees' > identities or fire them within 90 days. If they do not, employers > could face "stiff penalties," including fines and even criminal > prosecution, for violating a federal law that bars knowingly employing > illegal workers, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said > when he announced the plan Aug. 10. > > The plaintiffs convinced the judge that the Social Security > Administration database includes so many errors -- incorporated in the > records of about 9.5 million people in 2003 alone -- that its use in > firings would unfairly discriminate against tens of thousands of legal > workers, including native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens, and > cause major workforce disruptions that would burden companies. > > "The government's proposal to disseminate no-match letters affecting > more than eight million workers will, under the mandated time line, > result in the termination of employment to lawfully employed workers," > the judge wrote. "Moreover the threat of criminal prosecution . . . > reflects a major change in DHS policy." > > Breyer also said that the government may have ignored a 1980 law, the > Regulatory Flexibility Act, that requires it to weigh the cost of > imposing new regulations that would significantly burden small- > business owners. Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the Chamber of > Commerce, said the ruling shows that "the government cannot do > anything it wants simply in the name of enforcement. They've got to be > careful about building their record and complying with the law." > In a statement, AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney said: "This is a > significant step towards overturning this unlawful rule, which would > give employers an even stronger way to keep workers from freely > forming unions. . . . More than 70% of SSA discrepancies refer to U.S. > citizens." > > Chertoff expressed disappointment with the decision and said the > administration will continue to aggressively enforce immigration laws > while considering an appeal, which plaintiffs' attorneys said could > take at least nine months. > "Today's ruling is yet another reminder of why we need Congress to > enact comprehensive immigration reform," Chertoff said. "The American > people have been loud and clear about their desire to see our nation's > immigration laws enforced." > > Several analysts said the Bush administration's plan appeared to be > designed to push business interests back into the debate by > demonstrating that the failure of legislative reform efforts would > carry costs, and to reassure conservative lawmakers who oppose illegal > immigration that the White House is able and willing to crack down on > offenders. > > Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and > Naturalization Service and now a senior fellow at the nonpartisan > Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said the ruling "shows how > ineffective the current laws are." > "It reinforces the opinion that many of us hold that until you have a > better legal framework -- which requires new legislation -- we're > stuck very much with the status quo," Meissner said. > > In a statement, Rep. Brian P. Bilbray (R-Calif.), an opponent of > Bush's approach who won election to the House last year on the issue, > criticized the court. "What part of 'illegal' does Judge Breyer not > understand?" he said. "At a time when the federal government is > finally trying to enforce current immigration law, we cannot have > activist judges stand in the way of doing what is right." > The scope of the problem is uncontested. A three-year government audit > ending in 2001 found "widespread" misuse of Social Security numbers by > illegal immigrants, who often present fake or fraudulent documents to > obtain jobs. > > Overall, 7.2 million illegal immigrants account for at least 10 > percent of low-skilled U.S. workers and 5 percent of the total U.S. > workforce, according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of 2005 census > data. > Illegal immigrants make up even greater portions of workers in > specific industries, including 24 percent in farming, 17 percent in > cleaning, 14 percent in construction and 12 percent in food > preparation. But the government's record in developing tools to screen > such workers is spotty, largely because of successful efforts by > employers, labor unions and civil rights groups to water them down. > > A government program to verify the validity of new hires' Social > Security numbers, proposed in concept in 1981 and launched in 1996, > remains voluntary and covers only about 23,000 of 8 million U.S. > employers. It is also hampered by a high false-alarm rate and the > limited ability to detect identity theft involving stolen or > fraudulent numbers. Between June 2004 and May 2006, it erroneously > rejected 11 percent of foreign-born U.S. citizens and 1.3 percent of > authorized foreign-born noncitizens, according to a report provided to > Congress. > > In protest, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) signed legislation in > August that bars companies in his state from participating in the > program until it is 99 percent accurate. > > The federal government has mailed Social Security no-match letters to > employers since 1994, but such notices were generally silent about > workers' immigration status and employers did not face liability. In > June 2006, the Department of Homeland Security proposed using the > letters to combat immigration fraud involving existing employees, and > it finalized its plans this summer. The AFL-CIO and the ACLU filed > suit to halt the Sept. 4 start of the mailings, and they were joined > by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the trade associations for the > agriculture, restaurant and construction industries. > > On Aug. 31, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney issued a temporary > restraining order pending an Oct. 1 hearing before Breyer, who was > appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and is the sister of > Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer. > > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/10/AR200... > > Just keep chipping away at the rotting foundations of government. ted Quote
Guest lorad474@cs.com Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 On Oct 11, 12:12 pm, greg3347 <theodor...@lycos.com> wrote: > On Oct 11, 10:20 am, bigTITS <clitte...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry, folks. But a federal judge has blocked your Nincompoop-In- > > Chief's effort to stop the hiring of ILLEGALS. > > > We may not like it, but we'll have to face it sooner -- or LATER. > > Whatever number of illegals are here at this time will be granted a > > path to legal citizenship. By federal law. > > > This might take 5, 10, 15 years, but the shear numbers of illegals in > > the U.S. precludes any and all of your wild ideas for "getting rid of > > them." > > > AND IF CONGRESS and your White House war criminal don't pass an > > immigration reform bill in the fairly near future, the COURTS will > > intervene and "institute" reform by negating and gutting more federal > > and local anti-immigrant "laws." > > > SO -- shout, scream, jump-up-and-down, pull your hair, curse your > > politicians, commit hate crimes, threaten "action" of some kind -- but > > sooner or later some form of AMNESTY will become the law of the land, > > like Brown vs. Board of Education. > > > Your federal government helped create this problem through decades of > > indifference and neglect. > > > And soon your federal government will correct the problem, too. > > > ---------------------- > > > "Effort to Curb Illegal Workers' Hiring Blocked" > > > By Spencer S. Hsu > > Washington Post Staff Writer > > Thursday, October 11, 2007; A01 > > > A federal judge barred the Bush administration yesterday from > > launching a planned crackdown on U.S. companies that employ illegal > > immigrants, warning of its potentially "staggering" impact on law- > > abiding workers and companies. > > In a firm rebuke of the White House, U.S. District Judge Charles R. > > Breyer of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction against the > > president's plan to press employers to fire as many as 8.7 million > > workers with suspect Social Security numbers, starting this fall. > > > President Bush made the effort the centerpiece of a re-energized > > enforcement drive against illegal immigration in August after the > > Senate rejected his proposal to overhaul immigration laws. But the > > court ruling -- sought by major American labor, business and farm > > organizations -- highlighted the chasm that the issue has opened > > between the Republican Party and its traditional business allies. > > > The case also called attention to the gulf between Washington rhetoric > > about the need to curtail illegal immigration and the economic reality > > that many U.S. employers rely on illegal labor, as well as to the > > government's inability for nearly three decades to develop adequate > > tools for identifying undocumented workers. > > > In a 22-page ruling, Breyer said the plaintiffs -- an unusual > > coalition that included the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties > > Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- had raised serious questions > > about the legality of the administration's plan to mail Social > > Security "no-match" letters to 140,000 U.S. employers. > > > "There can be no doubt that the effects of the rule's implementation > > will be severe," Breyer wrote, resulting in "irreparable harm to > > innocent workers and employers." > > > The government letters are intended to warn employers for the first > > time that they must resolve questions about their employees' > > identities or fire them within 90 days. If they do not, employers > > could face "stiff penalties," including fines and even criminal > > prosecution, for violating a federal law that bars knowingly employing > > illegal workers, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said > > when he announced the plan Aug. 10. > > > The plaintiffs convinced the judge that the Social Security > > Administration database includes so many errors -- incorporated in the > > records of about 9.5 million people in 2003 alone -- that its use in > > firings would unfairly discriminate against tens of thousands of legal > > workers, including native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens, and > > cause major workforce disruptions that would burden companies. > > > "The government's proposal to disseminate no-match letters affecting > > more than eight million workers will, under the mandated time line, > > result in the termination of employment to lawfully employed workers," > > the judge wrote. "Moreover the threat of criminal prosecution . . . > > reflects a major change in DHS policy." > > > Breyer also said that the government may have ignored a 1980 law, the > > Regulatory Flexibility Act, that requires it to weigh the cost of > > imposing new regulations that would significantly burden small- > > business owners. Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the Chamber of > > Commerce, said the ruling shows that "the government cannot do > > anything it wants simply in the name of enforcement. They've got to be > > careful about building their record and complying with the law." > > In a statement, AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney said: "This is a > > significant step towards overturning this unlawful rule, which would > > give employers an even stronger way to keep workers from freely > > forming unions. . . . More than 70% of SSA discrepancies refer to U.S. > > citizens." > > > Chertoff expressed disappointment with the decision and said the > > administration will continue to aggressively enforce immigration laws > > while considering an appeal, which plaintiffs' attorneys said could > > take at least nine months. > > "Today's ruling is yet another reminder of why we need Congress to > > enact comprehensive immigration reform," Chertoff said. "The American > > people have been loud and clear about their desire to see our nation's > > immigration laws enforced." > > > Several analysts said the Bush administration's plan appeared to be > > designed to push business interests back into the debate by > > demonstrating that the failure of legislative reform efforts would > > carry costs, and to reassure conservative lawmakers who oppose illegal > > immigration that the White House is able and willing to crack down on > > offenders. > > > Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and > > Naturalization Service and now a senior fellow at the nonpartisan > > Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said the ruling "shows how > > ineffective the current laws are." > > "It reinforces the opinion that many of us hold that until you have a > > better legal framework -- which requires new legislation -- we're > > stuck very much with the status quo," Meissner said. > > > In a statement, Rep. Brian P. Bilbray (R-Calif.), an opponent of > > Bush's approach who won election to the House last year on the issue, > > criticized the court. "What part of 'illegal' does Judge Breyer not > > understand?" he said. "At a time when the federal government is > > finally trying to enforce current immigration law, we cannot have > > activist judges stand in the way of doing what is right." > > The scope of the problem is uncontested. A three-year government audit > > ending in 2001 found "widespread" misuse of Social Security numbers by > > illegal immigrants, who often present fake or fraudulent documents to > > obtain jobs. > > > Overall, 7.2 million illegal immigrants account for at least 10 > > percent of low-skilled U.S. workers and 5 percent of the total U.S. > > workforce, according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of 2005 census > > data. > > Illegal immigrants make up even greater portions of workers in > > specific industries, including 24 percent in farming, 17 percent in > > cleaning, 14 percent in construction and 12 percent in food > > preparation. But the government's record in developing tools to screen > > such workers is spotty, largely because of successful efforts by > > employers, labor unions and civil rights groups to water them down. > > > A government program to verify the validity of new hires' Social > > Security numbers, proposed in concept in 1981 and launched in 1996, > > remains voluntary and covers only about 23,000 of 8 million U.S. > > employers. It is also hampered by a high false-alarm rate and the > > limited ability to detect identity theft involving stolen or > > fraudulent numbers. Between June 2004 and May 2006, it erroneously > > rejected 11 percent of foreign-born U.S. citizens and 1.3 percent of > > authorized foreign-born noncitizens, according to a report provided to > > Congress. > > > In protest, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) signed legislation in > > August that bars companies in his state from participating in the > > program until it is 99 percent accurate. > > > The federal government has mailed Social Security no-match letters to > > employers since 1994, but such notices were generally silent about > > workers' immigration status and employers did not face liability. In > > June 2006, the Department of Homeland Security proposed using the > > letters to combat immigration fraud involving existing employees, and > > it finalized its plans this summer. The AFL-CIO and the ACLU filed > > suit to halt the Sept. 4 start of the mailings, and they were joined > > by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the trade associations for the > > agriculture, restaurant and construction industries. > > > On Aug. 31, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney issued a temporary > > restraining order pending an Oct. 1 hearing before Breyer, who was > > appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and is the sister of > > Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer. > > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/10/AR200... > > > Just keep chipping away at the rotting foundations of government. > > ted How many mexical criminals do you have in your neighborhood? Enough for you to organize one of your daisey-chain celebratory romps? Quote
Guest greg3347 Posted October 12, 2007 Posted October 12, 2007 On Oct 11, 12:19 pm, lorad...@cs.com wrote: > On Oct 11, 12:12 pm, greg3347 <theodor...@lycos.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 11, 10:20 am, bigTITS <clitte...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > Sorry, folks. But a federal judge has blocked your Nincompoop-In- > > > Chief's effort to stop the hiring of ILLEGALS. > > > > We may not like it, but we'll have to face it sooner -- or LATER. > > > Whatever number of illegals are here at this time will be granted a > > > path to legal citizenship. By federal law. > > > > This might take 5, 10, 15 years, but the shear numbers of illegals in > > > the U.S. precludes any and all of your wild ideas for "getting rid of > > > them." > > > > AND IF CONGRESS and your White House war criminal don't pass an > > > immigration reform bill in the fairly near future, the COURTS will > > > intervene and "institute" reform by negating and gutting more federal > > > and local anti-immigrant "laws." > > > > SO -- shout, scream, jump-up-and-down, pull your hair, curse your > > > politicians, commit hate crimes, threaten "action" of some kind -- but > > > sooner or later some form of AMNESTY will become the law of the land, > > > like Brown vs. Board of Education. > > > > Your federal government helped create this problem through decades of > > > indifference and neglect. > > > > And soon your federal government will correct the problem, too. > > > > ---------------------- > > > > "Effort to Curb Illegal Workers' Hiring Blocked" > > > > By Spencer S. Hsu > > > Washington Post Staff Writer > > > Thursday, October 11, 2007; A01 > > > > A federal judge barred the Bush administration yesterday from > > > launching a planned crackdown on U.S. companies that employ illegal > > > immigrants, warning of its potentially "staggering" impact on law- > > > abiding workers and companies. > > > In a firm rebuke of the White House, U.S. District Judge Charles R. > > > Breyer of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction against the > > > president's plan to press employers to fire as many as 8.7 million > > > workers with suspect Social Security numbers, starting this fall. > > > > President Bush made the effort the centerpiece of a re-energized > > > enforcement drive against illegal immigration in August after the > > > Senate rejected his proposal to overhaul immigration laws. But the > > > court ruling -- sought by major American labor, business and farm > > > organizations -- highlighted the chasm that the issue has opened > > > between the Republican Party and its traditional business allies. > > > > The case also called attention to the gulf between Washington rhetoric > > > about the need to curtail illegal immigration and the economic reality > > > that many U.S. employers rely on illegal labor, as well as to the > > > government's inability for nearly three decades to develop adequate > > > tools for identifying undocumented workers. > > > > In a 22-page ruling, Breyer said the plaintiffs -- an unusual > > > coalition that included the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties > > > Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- had raised serious questions > > > about the legality of the administration's plan to mail Social > > > Security "no-match" letters to 140,000 U.S. employers. > > > > "There can be no doubt that the effects of the rule's implementation > > > will be severe," Breyer wrote, resulting in "irreparable harm to > > > innocent workers and employers." > > > > The government letters are intended to warn employers for the first > > > time that they must resolve questions about their employees' > > > identities or fire them within 90 days. If they do not, employers > > > could face "stiff penalties," including fines and even criminal > > > prosecution, for violating a federal law that bars knowingly employing > > > illegal workers, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said > > > when he announced the plan Aug. 10. > > > > The plaintiffs convinced the judge that the Social Security > > > Administration database includes so many errors -- incorporated in the > > > records of about 9.5 million people in 2003 alone -- that its use in > > > firings would unfairly discriminate against tens of thousands of legal > > > workers, including native-born and naturalized U.S. citizens, and > > > cause major workforce disruptions that would burden companies. > > > > "The government's proposal to disseminate no-match letters affecting > > > more than eight million workers will, under the mandated time line, > > > result in the termination of employment to lawfully employed workers," > > > the judge wrote. "Moreover the threat of criminal prosecution . . . > > > reflects a major change in DHS policy." > > > > Breyer also said that the government may have ignored a 1980 law, the > > > Regulatory Flexibility Act, that requires it to weigh the cost of > > > imposing new regulations that would significantly burden small- > > > business owners. Randel K. Johnson, a vice president of the Chamber of > > > Commerce, said the ruling shows that "the government cannot do > > > anything it wants simply in the name of enforcement. They've got to be > > > careful about building their record and complying with the law." > > > In a statement, AFL-CIO President John J. Sweeney said: "This is a > > > significant step towards overturning this unlawful rule, which would > > > give employers an even stronger way to keep workers from freely > > > forming unions. . . . More than 70% of SSA discrepancies refer to U.S. > > > citizens." > > > > Chertoff expressed disappointment with the decision and said the > > > administration will continue to aggressively enforce immigration laws > > > while considering an appeal, which plaintiffs' attorneys said could > > > take at least nine months. > > > "Today's ruling is yet another reminder of why we need Congress to > > > enact comprehensive immigration reform," Chertoff said. "The American > > > people have been loud and clear about their desire to see our nation's > > > immigration laws enforced." > > > > Several analysts said the Bush administration's plan appeared to be > > > designed to push business interests back into the debate by > > > demonstrating that the failure of legislative reform efforts would > > > carry costs, and to reassure conservative lawmakers who oppose illegal > > > immigration that the White House is able and willing to crack down on > > > offenders. > > > > Doris Meissner, former commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and > > > Naturalization Service and now a senior fellow at the nonpartisan > > > Migration Policy Institute in Washington, said the ruling "shows how > > > ineffective the current laws are." > > > "It reinforces the opinion that many of us hold that until you have a > > > better legal framework -- which requires new legislation -- we're > > > stuck very much with the status quo," Meissner said. > > > > In a statement, Rep. Brian P. Bilbray (R-Calif.), an opponent of > > > Bush's approach who won election to the House last year on the issue, > > > criticized the court. "What part of 'illegal' does Judge Breyer not > > > understand?" he said. "At a time when the federal government is > > > finally trying to enforce current immigration law, we cannot have > > > activist judges stand in the way of doing what is right." > > > The scope of the problem is uncontested. A three-year government audit > > > ending in 2001 found "widespread" misuse of Social Security numbers by > > > illegal immigrants, who often present fake or fraudulent documents to > > > obtain jobs. > > > > Overall, 7.2 million illegal immigrants account for at least 10 > > > percent of low-skilled U.S. workers and 5 percent of the total U.S. > > > workforce, according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of 2005 census > > > data. > > > Illegal immigrants make up even greater portions of workers in > > > specific industries, including 24 percent in farming, 17 percent in > > > cleaning, 14 percent in construction and 12 percent in food > > > preparation. But the government's record in developing tools to screen > > > such workers is spotty, largely because of successful efforts by > > > employers, labor unions and civil rights groups to water them down. > > > > A government program to verify the validity of new hires' Social > > > Security numbers, proposed in concept in 1981 and launched in 1996, > > > remains voluntary and covers only about 23,000 of 8 million U.S. > > > employers. It is also hampered by a high false-alarm rate and the > > > limited ability to detect identity theft involving stolen or > > > fraudulent numbers. Between June 2004 and May 2006, it erroneously > > > rejected 11 percent of foreign-born U.S. citizens and 1.3 percent of > > > authorized foreign-born noncitizens, according to a report provided to > > > Congress. > > > > In protest, Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D) signed legislation in > > > August that bars companies in his state from participating in the > > > program until it is 99 percent accurate. > > > > The federal government has mailed Social Security no-match letters to > > > employers since 1994, but such notices were generally silent about > > > workers' immigration status and employers did not face liability. In > > > June 2006, the Department of Homeland Security proposed using the > > > letters to combat immigration fraud involving existing employees, and > > > it finalized its plans this summer. The AFL-CIO and the ACLU filed > > > suit to halt the Sept. 4 start of the mailings, and they were joined > > > by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the trade associations for the > > > agriculture, restaurant and construction industries. > > > > On Aug. 31, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney issued a temporary > > > restraining order pending an Oct. 1 hearing before Breyer, who was > > > appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1997 and is the sister of > > > Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer. > > > >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/10/AR200... > > > > Just keep chipping away at the rotting foundations of government. > > > ted > > How many mexical criminals do you have in your neighborhood? > Enough for you to organize one of your daisey-chain celebratory romps?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Help! I'm on your. http://www.numbersusa.com/ NumbersUSA http://www.newnation.org/ New Nation News greg Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.