Blogs for Borders - Bloggers dedicated to American sovereignty, border security and a sane immigration policy. We support legal immigration. We share news, articles and opinions on issues related to our nation's borders, immigration policy, illegal aliens and amnesty proposals.
Home Page | Link-Up | Contact | Our Feed
Free Email Subscription | Facebook Group

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Feds release first illegal immigrants in Georgia

By Jeremy Redmon, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Federal authorities on Tuesday night began freeing illegal immigrants facing deportation from Georgia, releasing two teenagers from custody by using controversial new guidelines the Obama administration announced last week.

Homeland Security Department officials confirmed that Pedro Morales, 19, of Dalton and Luis “Ricky” Hernandez, 18, of Calhoun had been let out of the Stewart Detention Center in South Georgia and their cases dismissed.

By freeing illegal immigrants, critics say, the Obama administration is ignoring federal immigration laws. They also contend the government has not done enough to stem the flow of illegal immigrants to Georgia.

However, proponents of the new policy said it made sense for the government to focus its limited resources on killers, rapists and terrorists. They were hoping this would lead to the eventual passage of the Dream Act. That measure — which failed in Congress last year — would give illegal immigrants a path to legal status if they came here as children, graduated from high school and attended college or served in the military. . . .

Issuing a statement Tuesday night, Homeland Security said ICE “is focused on smart, effective immigration enforcement that prioritizes the removal of criminal aliens, recent border crossers and egregious immigration law violators, such as those who have been previously removed from the U.S. The agency exercises prosecutorial discretion, on a case-by-case basis, as necessary to focus resources on these priorities.”

The Obama administration announced the new federal guidelines last week, saying the government had limited resources for deporting and detaining illegal immigrants and must focus on expelling violent criminals and those who pose threats to national security.

The government is preparing to review about 300,000 cases before the immigration courts nationwide to see if they should continue or be dismissed, an action that has strong opposition.

“They are illegal immigrants and they need to be returned to their country like the law states,” said Lori Pesta, president of the Republican Women of Cherokee County. “This is a nation of laws. ... And the laws are there for a reason -- so we don’t live in chaos.”

Kuck, the past president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said ICE’s decision to free his clients indicates “there is a return of some semblance of sanity to our [immigration] system.”

The families for Hernandez and Morales cheered the news of the teens’ release. . . . [Full Story]

Tags: Homeland Security, Feds, release illegal immigrants, Georgia, amnesty, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

'Suspected' illegal future voter for Obama kills 4 year old boy: Hit and run

This 'suspected' illegal alien had two prior convictions on his driving record and his conditional license was expired. He was to appear before a judge in in October. Could he keep out from behind the wheel? NO! Did he have any insurance? NO!

Why was he not deported or held in detention for his previous convictions? Now a 4 year old boy is dead, run over inside a cross walk and his family has lost this precious life forever. Yet this criminal will be free either here or in Mexico someday in the hopefully, very far off future.

Now Obama, the first illegal Muslim Potus had stopped deporting thousands of illegal aliens and many like this one, as he was not a 'dangerous criminal or a threat to anyone will have no fear of being deported out of the United States.

How many Christopher “Buddy” Rowe's will have to die before this administration sees the error of it's policies? We will be adding up needless deaths like this one for years to come because progressive libtarded and RINO politicians are only concerned with getting as many votes as possible and it does not matter if they are legal voters or not. This is much more of a problem with far left politicians than Conservative politicians. obama and his traitorous administration have the blood of 'Buddy' Howe on their hands. NO amount of money, gifts or detergent from these American hating progressive socialists will ever bring this boy back.

Thanks Obama, for the continuing the flood of illegals into our country.
From the San Franciso Chronicle.

color=grey align=center, width=85% />
Christopher 'Buddy' Howe
Santa Rosa man charged in hit-run death of boy, 4

SANTA ROSA -- Sonoma County prosecutors filed charges Monday against an allegedly unlicensed driver who authorities say ran over a 4-year-old boy in a Santa Rosa crosswalk and sped off.

Marcos Lopez Garcia, 22, was charged in Superior Court with felony hit-and-run as well as two misdemeanors, vehicular manslaughter and driving without a valid license. He made an initial court appearance Monday but did not enter a plea.

Garcia, who is being held without bail because federal officials suspect him of being an illegal immigrant, has two previous arrests for driving without a license, records show. Five days before Thursday's crash, police said, he was told not to drive until a court appearance in October.

Garcia was charged in connection with the crash that killed 4-year-old Christopher "Buddy" Rowe of Santa Rosa, who was on his way to soccer practice.

Christopher was hit at about 6 p.m. at West Ninth Street and Rockwell Place near Jacobs Park while crossing with his mother, his twin sister and his 6-year-old sister. He clung to life at Children's Hospital Oakland, but "his heart finally gave way" Friday morning, his family said in a statement Monday.

"Little Buddy will be remembered as an energetic, curious, active young boy who was also kind, compassionate and caring, especially with his twin sister," the family said. "We will always remember his ever-present smile, beautiful steel blue eyes and peace-loving nature.

"The man who stole Buddy's life from us will be one day free," the family said, "but we will always carry the burden of losing him forever."

Christopher and his family were crossing West Ninth in a marked crosswalk when he was hit by a westbound Honda Accord, police said. The car drove away from the intersection, which has no stop signs or signals.

Soon, a 47-year-old Santa Rosa man named Leroy Flach - who heard about the crash on his police scanner - spotted the car at Finley Park, less than a mile from the crash. He said he had called police after he saw the driver peeling off an orange San Francisco Giants decal from the rear window.

The man got into a Volvo driven by a woman, Flach said. He relayed the license plate number to police, who by 8 p.m. had found and arrested Garcia, 22, who lives near Jacobs Park.

Christopher is survived by his parents, James Rowe Jr. and Michelle Rowe; his older sister, Mimi; and his twin sister, Julia; as well as grandparents, uncles and cousins.

A memorial service is scheduled for 3 p.m. Sunday at St. Eugene's Cathedral in Santa Rosa.

The family asks that condolences and donations be sent to the Christopher Rowe Memorial Fund, 1007 W. College Ave., No. 313, Santa Rosa, CA 95401. For more information, go to www.christopherbuddyrowe.com.

Original article is here

Read more about this murder below:
Suspected Illegal Immigrant Faces Charges in Alleged Hit-And-Run Death of California Boy

Plea delayed for man suspected in fatal Santa Rosa crosswalk hit-and-run crash

Tags: illegal alien, hit and run, kills, bloy, future voter, amnesty, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Justice delayed for legal immigrants

Illegal Immigration is a Crimeby Kenneth Wallis, Little Rock Immigration Examiner: While many in Arkansas got to hear about the West Memphis 3, legal immigrants who are waiting for years to be processed will have to wait longer because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) have decided to give around 300,000 illegal aliens legal status? Under the order of Soros Puppet Obama, thousands of illegal aliens will have their deportations “indefinitely delayed”.

For those unemployed/under employeed, there's some bad news for you too! The 300,000 illegals will also become eligible for "work permits". Most of these illegal aliens are supposed to be DREAM ACT Anchor Babies. but the criteria can be just about anything. There is a solution, that usual, the media will do everything to hide. Rep. Lamar Smith’s HALT Act (H.R. 2497) would take away the power from the bureaucrats in D.C. A complete story with links and facebook comments is at standwitharizona.com obama-amnesty-300000-illegal-aliens-work-permits/

Tags: Arkansas, Justice delayed, legal immigrants, amnesty, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Obama admin to allow many illegal aliens to stay

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration said Thursday it will allow many illegal immigrants facing deportation the chance to stay in this country and apply for a work permit, while focusing on removing from the U.S. convicted criminals and those who might be a national security or public safety threat.

That will mean a case-by-case review of approximately 300,000 illegal immigrants facing possible deportation in federal immigration courts, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in announcing the policy change.

Advocates for an immigration overhaul have said that the administration, by placing all illegal immigrants in the same category for deportation, has failed to live up to its promise to only deport the "worst of the worst," as President Barack Obama has said. . . .


Tags: Obama, amnesty, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Bilingual Ballots Are a Bad Idea

By Linda Chavez: At a time when many state and local governments cannot afford even necessary government programs, the Obama administration is about to force hundreds of jurisdictions to waste millions of dollars printing ballots in Spanish and other languages for voters who don't need them. Worse, some of these bilingual ballots may be used fraudulently to encourage people who are not citizens to vote illegally in next year's election.

A perverse element of the Voting Rights Act makes the whole scheme possible, and, unfortunately, not even Republicans have been willing to challenge it.

Under the act, jurisdictions whose population includes at least 5 percent of voting-age citizens who have limited English proficiency must provide ballots and other voting materials in other languages. Currently, about 500 jurisdictions are required to do so.

I have repeatedly testified before Congress against this provision. As I have argued, there are exceedingly few persons who are actually eligible to vote who can't understand English. English proficiency among U.S.-born Hispanics is virtually universal. And even among naturalized citizens, English proficiency is rarely a problem, since demonstrating English proficiency is required to become a U.S. citizen.

So how is it that so many jurisdictions end up having to provide materials in Spanish, Chinese and other languages, when so few eligible voters really need them?


Tags: elections, ballots, bilingual ballots, illegal voters To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Monday, August 15, 2011

To Reform Immigration, Legal and Illegal

By Mark Krikorian: Members of the chattering classes keep hoping the immigration issue will just go away. I was once interviewed on a radio show along with an activist on the other side who said Mexico’s falling birthrate would mean that pretty soon we’d be scratching our heads wondering what all the fuss over immigration policy was about. That was nearly 25 years ago. In 2006, Mexican president Vicente Fox said that in ten years we’d be begging for Mexican workers, but they wouldn’t come, because they’d all be employed at home. And just recently, the New York Times ran a front-page story on the coming end of the Mexican immigration flow, a meme eagerly picked up by Michael Barone, Linda Chavez, and other columnists.

There’s a germ of truth here: The flow of illegals across the Mexican border has indeed slowed during the recession. But the tapering off of mass immigration that is said to be just over the horizon always will be. There are nearly 40 million immigrants in the United States — about one in eight residents — and, even during the worst part of the recession, more than 1 million people moved here annually from abroad.

Until the fabled end of immigration actually comes, Republican presidential candidates will need to address the issue. For all their proper focus on government spending and debt, control of our borders remains a central concern of Republican primary voters, and for a large share of independents and Reagan Democrats. What’s more, the usual platitudes are no longer convincing them; having mobilized to stop the Bush-McCain amnesty, and eyeing with suspicion the current administration’s hijinks, voters are more educated than ever. Merely posturing about ever-higher fences, without engaging the issue as a whole, is no longer sufficient for a candidate to be taken seriously by voters concerned about immigration.

Before the last cycle of presidential primaries, I laid out a ten-point immigration plan with achievable goals for a nominee to embrace. This time, I want to do something a little different: lay out three packages of policies — a basic plan, an upgraded plan, and a premium plan — regarding immigration enforcement and numbers, some that a president could implement by himself, others requiring legislation.

The basic package consists of items that any serious Republican aspirant should support. With regard to illegal immigration, there are two main goals: fencing and mandating the use by all employers of E-Verify. With regard to legal immigration, also two goals: ending the visa lottery and eliminating brother-sister chain migration.

Five years ago, Congress mandated the construction of some 700 miles of fencing, and the administration claims that this mandate has been fulfilled. In fact, most of the result is not the two layers of reinforced fencing required by the law; only about 1 percent of the border with Mexico has this. Of the nearly 700 other fenced miles, close to half has only Normandy barriers, which are designed to stop trucks from simply driving over the border but otherwise are so unimposing that your grandmother could hop over one. (Heck, even I can hop over them, and have.) The other half is actual fencing — pedestrian fencing, in Homeland Security lingo — but almost all single-layer, and varying in design from one contractor to the next. Double fencing with roads allowing agents to patrol in between, supplemented by remote sensors and cameras to alert agents to breaches, and forward operating bases right along the border to cut response times — that the deployment of all this is needed should almost go without saying.

But even this stripped-down basic package has to include more than just hardening the border. Limiting the demand for illegals by weakening the attraction of employment is at least as important as limiting the supply by fencing. The policy objective here is to ensure that all new hires are screened through E-Verify, something House Judiciary Committee chairman Lamar Smith is working to make mandatory. Smith’s bill also simplifies the use of E-Verify, ends penalties for innocent paperwork errors, and codifies the process through which employers are informed about existing employees whose names and Social Security numbers don’t match. There has been controversy among immigration hawks about the bill’s preemption of certain state and local activity in this area, but since the states with the most illegals (California, New York, Illinois, even Texas) are unlikely to pass E-Verify mandates on their own, a federal measure is the only way to get it done.

It’s not enough for a candidate to say he’s against illegal immigration but in favor of legal immigration. The inevitable question then is: How much legal immigration, and by whom?

The most indefensible feature of our legal immigration system is the diversity visa lottery. It was invented in 1986 as a way to grant amnesty to Irish illegal aliens and has since morphed into a program that provides green cards at random to foreigners — most from the Middle East, Africa, and the former Soviet bloc — without any real standards concerning education or job skills. Each year’s 50,000 winners have friends and family back home, many of whom will then also want to immigrate. And the 15 million people who applied last year developed expectations of moving to the United States that could never be met, thus encouraging illegal immigration.

Another legal-immigration no-brainer concerns the 60,000 adult siblings of U.S. citizens who are allowed to migrate to the United States each year simply because of their brothers or sisters. Adult-sibling immigration means an ever-larger share of the globe’s population has a claim to enter the United States, as the siblings of earlier immigrants enter with their spouses, who have their own siblings, whose spouses in turn have their own siblings, and so on. No other country allows this, and there’s simply no “family reunification” rationale for admitting from abroad whole new families of adults.

These two changes alone — ending the visa lottery and chain migration — would reduce future legal immigration from about 1.1 million to about 1 million a year.

An upgraded package would include everything in the basic package, plus the following legal- and illegal-immigration reforms.

The first is to double deportations. Much of the reduction in the illegal population will come voluntarily, as illegal aliens come to understand they will not be able to find work or live a normal life here. But that is no reason to let up on deportations. Unfortunately, the Obama administration is doing just that. It has touted the “removal” of nearly 400,000 aliens each year (a statistic that also includes the exclusion of people trying to enter the country), but in fact the steady increase in deportations we saw since the mid-1990s has come to halt. Doubling the number of aliens deported, both violent criminals and ordinary illegal aliens, is a practical goal. Achieving it would require expanded use of “expedited removal,” an authority granted by Congress to remove illegal aliens without going through the court system, along with more detention beds to hold illegals so they don’t run off while in proceedings, expanded partnering with local law enforcement through the Secure Communities and 287(g) programs, and arresting illegal aliens in worksite raids, something the Obama White House has essentially prohibited.

Second, we should fully implement the US-VISIT program, which is supposed to check in and check out foreign visitors, verifying their identities with biometric information, allowing us better to know who’s entered, who’s departed, and who’s remained here as an illegal alien. Congress has repeatedly demanded the completion of this system, which was first mandated in 1996, and there’s been progress, but the administration has announced that it has no intention of finishing the job. At present, the information is collected from outbound air travelers voluntarily at airport kiosks — hardly a secure approach. The vast majority of foreign visitors (most of them Canadians and Mexicans crossing overland on ostensibly short visits) are not being checked in or out at all.

The third component would be to go beyond the basic package in ending chain migration. For obvious reasons, we grant special immigration privileges to the foreign-born spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens: Husbands, wives, and minor children should be together. But there is no equally obvious reason to extend similar privileges to adult children or parents, or to the newly married spouses of non-citizen green-card holders. To do so obscures the relationship between citizenship and immigration rights. Limiting family immigration to the husbands, wives, and dependent children of American citizens would still allow in a pretty large number — more than 350,000 of last year’s 1.1 million new legal immigrants would still have qualified — but it would prevent endless chains of relatives from taking over the immigration flow.

The upgraded package would reduce future legal admissions to about 700,000 per year.

The premium package includes everything from the first two, ends birthright citizenship, and reduces the number of immigrants entering the country on skilled-worker or refugee/asylum grounds.

Each year, some 300,000 children are born to illegal-alien mothers, acquiring U.S. citizenship at birth. In addition, thousands more come here on temporary visas to give birth, then depart once they receive their children’s U.S. birth certificates and passports. It’s a matter of debate whether the 14th Amendment to the Constitution actually grants citizenship for children born to illegals or tourists, and thus whether changing our citizenship rules must be done through legislation or constitutional amendment. But it should be done in either case.

The first two packages have already addressed the biggest problems with the legal immigration flow — its slide into nepotism through chain migration. This premium version focuses on two other immigrant categories: skills-based immigrants and those seeking refugee/asylum admissions. Each of these broad groups comprises roughly 150,000 immigrants per year and should be radically reduced — my preference would be to cut them by two-thirds, to 50,000. The wailing and gnashing of teeth from business lobbyists about skilled foreigners turned away from the golden door is baloney; while the skills category does enable the immigration of some truly exceptional workers, research shows that it admits large numbers of average workers who appeal to employers mainly as cheap labor. Something similar is true of the refugee/asylum category — some who qualify for it truly have no other option, but most use it simply as an alternative means to move here for work or to join relatives. Sharpening the focus of both these categories will not undermine their purposes, but will result in lower numbers of immigrants.

The premium package would lead to a legal immigration flow of about half a million per year, much less than today’s level but still higher than the historical average over the past two centuries.

None of these packages encompasses every element of immigration reform. Unaddressed concerns include temporary workers, dual citizenship, and the State Department’s continued role in issuing visas. But these three packages will, I hope, help both candidates and voters think through some of the most important aspects of this vital issue.
Mr. Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies. This article originally appeared in the August 15, 2011, issue of National Review Online And is
a summary of key points in his new book The New Case Against Immigration, Both Legal and Illegal

Tags: Mark Krikorian, Center for Immigration Studies, immigration reform, legal immigration, illegal immigration, amnesty, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Report: 40 U.S. States Passed Immigration Laws in 2011

Rasmussen Report
(March 16, 2011)
ARRA News Service - Karen Brooks, NewsMax - Reuters reports: Nearly 250 new immigration laws and resolutions were enacted in 40 U.S. states during the first half of this year, indicating frustration with the federal government's handling of the issue, according to a new report.

The laws range from hiring restrictions to voter identification and allowing in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, according to the report released Tuesday by the National Conference of State Legislatures. . . .

"States are reacting to the federal government in inefficiency and they're trying to figure out how to deal with it -- good, bad and ugly," said Wendy Sefsaf, director of communications at the American Immigration Council, a Washington think tank. Immigration impacts every policy issue there is, and people are trying to figure out how to manage it, for better or for worse, because the federal government won't." . . .

* Ten states enacted legislation requiring businesses or contractors to use the government E-Verify program to ensure the legal status of workers.

* Five states -- Alabama, Georgia, Utah, Indiana and South Carolina -- enacted omnibus laws inspired by Arizona's 2010 law, which gave police the power to enforce immigration. All have been challenged in court. (Editing by Greg McCune) . . . [Full Story]

Tags: immigration legislation, laws, states, 2011, illegal immigration, e-verify To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Friday, August 05, 2011

Immigrants Are Legal….Illegal “Immigrants” Are Criminals

The following was shared by one of our Link supporters: an An Ol'Broad's Ramblings.

Why Does America Welcome Immigrants?
The Foundry:Across the country, lawmakers are working to limit illegal immigration and reform policy so that more individuals can honorably and legally become American citizens. Last year’s notorious immigration battle in Arizona was met with hostility from pro-illegal immigration forces who misunderstood the Founders’ intent for a legal and meaningful naturalization process into America.

Now, the same kind of battle is heating up in Alabama. With an estimated 120,000 illegal immigrants (according to the Pew Hispanic Center), Alabama leaders felt the federal laws weren’t protecting the state adequately. Considering the population has increased fivefold what it was 10 years ago, one can sympathize.

Alabama’s new law is currently being met by a lawsuit from the Department of Justice (DOJ) but the case is unwarranted. As Heritage’s Matt Mayer writes:
The argument that state and local governments mustincur enormous fiscal and societal costs, asserting that all aspects of immigration (legal or illegal) are entirely the purview of the federal government, is constitutionally suspect.
…Alabama’s new law is sweeping only in the sense that it encompasses many laws passed in other states in one bill (E-verify, voter identification, benefits, immigration status, etc.). Most of the provisions are consistent with positions upheld in court or not subject to legal challenges.”
The Declaration of Independence states that all men—not just all Americans—have a God-given right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That said, the task of the US government is to secure the rights of its own citizens—not mankind. The liberties and opportunities that the US affords its citizens are the main reason why so many people long to immigrate here. And because America is built on the idea of universal equality, all may become citizens in principle (not in practice of course).

The naturalization process isn’t automatic the minute one crosses over a country line, though. It requires education, dedication and commitment to the American way. Alexander Hamilton wrote that prospective immigrants should “learn the principles and imbibe the spirit of our government; and to admit of a philosophy at least, of their feeling a real interest in our affairs.”

Heritage’s Dr. Matthew Spalding writes in the “Understanding America” series “Why Does America Welcome Immigrants?”:
Individuals have a natural right to emigrate from their homeland, but that does not entail a right to immigrate to this country without the consent of the American people as expressed through the laws of the United States.
…When the American people welcome an immigrant, naturalization in America works differently than it does in other countries. A foreigner can immigrate to France or Japan but never become truly French or Japanese. But a foreigner of any ethnic heritage or racial background can immigrate to the U.S. and become, in every sense of the term, an American.
Such a citizenship is a privilege and America’s openness to immigrants from all religions, backgrounds, and cultures makes it an exceptional one. The latest crackdown on illegal immigration in Alabama doesn’t mean things are changing from that view.

While the arguments surrounding illegal immigration are fiery, they ultimately center on a common desire to expand America’s melting pot. Despite the disagreement on methodology, America overwhelmingly welcomes immigrants as no other country does. Spalding writes:
While there are differences of opinion about the number of immigrants the nation should accept and the process by which they should become citizens, there has always been widespread, bipartisan agreement that those who come here should become Americans.
Many foreigners risk death and violence every single day in hopes of setting foot on American soil. The promise of the American dream lures men of every shade and culture because of the exceptional freedom and opportunity offered within our borders and these basic human rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence are such that men would leave their homes and risk their lives for an opportunity to exercise them.

“America welcomes newcomers while insisting that they learn and embrace its civic culture and political institutions, thereby form­ing one nation from many peoples—e pluribus unum,” writes Spalding.

Thus, in the legal immigration process, individuals receive specific education in history, policy, and political ideas so they become assimilated to the country in the most natural way possible. Without such education, it would be difficult to grasp the “fundamental sense [that] America is an exceptional nation not because of what it does—but because of what it believes,” writes Heritage’s David Azzerad.

To understand America, it is imperative to recognize the importance of immigrants to our nation’s past, present and future. It is also important to note those immigrants’ essential allegiance to the American political order first and foremost.

Tags: legal immigrants, legal, illegal, illegal immigrants, illegal aliens, Heritage Foundation, The Foundry To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!