Blogs for Borders IS NO LONGER UPDATED! America is awakened to the insane policies of illegal immigration, amnesty, unsecure borders opposed by bloggers dedicated to American sovereignty. -- Original Feed!
Facebook Group Still Active! Join Us!

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Illegal and Paid for

By Glenn Gallas Sr.: Illegal immigration has become one of the largest dangers to the fiscal stability of Arkansas as well as the rest of the United States. While the social challenges of illegal immigration are complicated and diverse the economic impact is certain. Arkansas has done a good job of avoiding many of the fiscal challenges other states have experienced. Arkansas has done so by first having a balanced budget requirement that has prevented the runaway spending unrestricted budgets have caused. Secondly Arkansas’s elected representatives have done a good job of exercising restraint in spending.

The challenge however is the undetected and growing cost of illegal immigration in Arkansas. If we continue to keep our heads in the sand about the challenge as well as the mounting costs of illegal immigration we will fall victim to the same budget crisis that all but four states have fallen. There are two parts to the solution the first is to identify exactly who is using the taxpayer funded entitlement programs and secondly what are the costs of supplying such entitlements to those who are here illegal. The following facts where gathered by credible sources from the government as well as non-governmental agencies.

Arkansas needs its elected representatives to vote for HB 1292 and begin the process of gathering the true fiscal impact of policies that affect every taxpayer in Arkansas.

The immigrant population in Arkansas grew tremendously with thousands of immigrants arriving to work in poultry and construction jobs during the 1900s. Arkansas immigrant population increased by 196 percent and experienced the fourth largest percent increase in immigrants in the U.S. during the 1990s. According to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) figures, 27,000 illegal aliens resided in Arkansas as of 2000. This figure is 400 percent higher than the previous USCIS estimate in 1996. FAIR, (Federation for American Immigration Reform) estimates the illegal alien population in 2005 at 49,000. This number is 81% above the U.S. government estimate of 27,000 in 2000, and 880% above the 1990 estimate of 5,000. According to the US Census Bureau the largest influx of population came from Texas.

Mexico accounted for more than one-quarter of the foreign-born population in March 2000. Mexico’s proportion in 2000 is the largest recorded share any country has held since the decennial census in 1890 approximately 7.1 million immigrants (21.2 percent) of households with foreign-born householders

In 1999, 21.2 percent, of households with foreign born householders participated in one or more of the following means tested programs providing noncash benefits: food stamps, housing assistance, or medicaid.

22.2 percent of foreign born individuals have no health insurance. The highest participation rates for Medicaid are higher for households with noncitizen householders 24.8 percent.

Using data from California and New Jersey, the panel estimated how much immigrant households — those headed by foreign-born people — cost state and local taxpayers. This was calculated by subtracting the costs of services those households use — such as public education, police and fire, welfare, and public health — from the amount of taxes they pay on an annual basis. These estimates were made before new laws eliminated welfare benefits for legal immigrants who are not U.S. citizens.

In California, where many new immigrants live, each native household is paying about $1,178 a year in state and local taxes to cover services used by immigrant households, the panel said. In New Jersey, which has a more established immigrant population, the calculation is about $232 a year. Arkansas’s estimated cost is $706 per immigrant

On an annual basis, new immigrant families receive more in publicly funded services than they pay in taxes, the panel said. Most — especially those from Latin America — tend to have more school-aged children and require more educational services than other households. Although immigrants use about the same level of government services as native-born residents, most immigrants pay less taxes because they own less property and have lower-paying jobs. The study was funded by the U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform. The National Research Council is the principal operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering.

According to the Paw Hispanic Center website, in their investigation of immigration crime statistics and the federal law courts records, 40% of all sentenced federal offenders were Latinos. Of those, 72% were not U.S. citizens.

Based on the preceding reports the following costs were calculated.
Illegal Immigrant population 29457 to 53459 [in Arkansas]
Cost per illegal immigrant for state services -706.80 per 20.8 million minimum to 37.8 million maximum
Cost per illegal immigrant for education – 37.3 million
Cost per US born child of illegal alien – 52.2 million
Illegal alien incarceration costs = 96.8 million
Est annual cost – 207.1 million to 224.1 million
Est cost in 2020- 356 million
Sources –
US Census Bureau
United States Citizenship and Immigration Service
Federation for American Immigration Reform
Center for Immigration Studies
Pew Hispanic Center
Glenn Gallas Sr. is an Arkansas conservative activist, community leader, blogger and online radio host.

Tags: Arkansas, illegal aliens, cost, economic impact, Glenn Gallas, To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Arizona paving the way for our nation: Passes birthright citizen law and more

Arizona led the way last year with a controversial bill to fight the flood of illegal aliens that are pouring into our country from Mexico and into Arizona. Even while portions of that bill, 1070 are being debated, Arizona passed this bill just yesterday. The bill addresses the birthright of illegal alien children and much more. Way to go Arizona!

Arizona Senate Panel Passes Birthright Citizen Law

Fox News: PHOENIX -- An Arizona Senate committee approved a bill late Tuesday designed to set up a U.S. Supreme Courtcase on automatic citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.

The Republican-led Appropriations Committee panel was also expected to consider a more sweeping bill later Tuesday that would target illegal immigrants in public housing, public benefits and the workplace.

That measure, which would add to last year's controversial Arizona illegal immigration law, drew vocal opposition from Democrats, who say its sponsor isn't focused on Republicans' stated top priority, the economy.

The 29-page bill was introduced by Republican Sen. Russell Pearce, who also authored last year's law, which touched off a nationwide debate on whether states can enforce federal immigration laws.< Democrats don't have the votes to block the Pearce's most recent measure, but the topic brought out supporters on both sides and security at the Senate was heightened, with about a dozen uniformed police officers deployed in and around the building. Some of the officers outside the building stood between small groups of people as they exchanged catcalls and jeers. Police said four people were arrested and cited for disorderly conduct after disrupting a Democratic senator's news conference about her bill stiffening penalties for a human smuggling crime. Pearce's bill toughens requirements that employers check work eligibility of new hires, allowing for their business licenses to be suspended if they don't use the federal E-Verify system. Workers caught using a false identity to get a job would face mandatory six-month jail sentences. It also requires schools to collect information on the legal status of students and report them to law enforcement if their parents don't provide the necessary documents or the documents appear false. The bill also makes it illegal for an illegal immigrant to drive in the state, providing for a 30-day minimum jail sentence and the seizure of their vehicles if they are convicted. In housing, it requires public agencies to verify the immigration status of renters and to evict everyone living in a unit if one was found to be an illegal immigrant. For health care, the bill changes some of the document requirements for the state's Medicaid program. Another bill set for debate would require hospitals to confirm whether nonemergency patients are in the country legally. The medical industry opposes that bill, arguing that immigrants with contagious diseases, such as tuberculosis, would avoid going to hospitals or clinic, putting themselves and the public at a grave health risk.

Sponsors of the automatic citizenship bill approved by the Senate panel earlier Tuesday hope it will prompt a court interpretation on an element of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to people born in the country or who are "subject to the jurisdiction" of the U.S.

Bill proponents said the amendment doesn't apply to the children of illegal immigrants because such families don't owe sole allegiance to the U.S.

An hours-long debate centered on whether the measure would save Arizona money by keeping children of illegal immigrants from potentially burdening the state with the costs of benefits that go to citizens.

"Constantly I'm asked by my constituents, 'Why is it that when illegal aliens sneak into this country their children are automatically citizens?"' said the bill's Republican sponsor, Sen. Ron Gould of Lake Havasu City.

But the leader of the Arizona Chamber of Commerce said lawmakers should focus their efforts on measures similar to the jobs bill they recently approved.

"We believe this case is one which would not get very far, and we are very, very, concerned about the economic consequences of this measure," said Glenn Hamer, the state Chamber's chief executive.

An accompanying proposal was also approved by the committee that would establish an interstate compact that defines who is a U.S. citizen and asks states to issue separate birth certificates for those who are citizens and those who are designated as not citizens.

Similar proposals defining who would get automatic citizenship have been introduced by lawmakers in Indiana, Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma and South Dakota. Backers expect another dozen states will take up the issue this year.

Tags: Arizona, e-verify, birthright citizenship, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Monday, February 21, 2011

Mexico bans U.S. law enforcement officials from carrying guns

Talk about a stupid, outdated agreement. Mexico has a 'law' on the books that prohibits those who are in U.S. Law enforcement from carrying weapons while down in Mexico. This absurdity of this policy in today's war like environment, where the cartels outgun the Mexican government in almost every battle is really pathetic. Now we have one deaf agent and another one seriously wounded. The obama folks have 'promised' to look into this matter and I am sure we can all breath easier now.

We must seal our border with Mexico and do so now, not yesterday, as that is too late.


Mexico bans U.S. law enforcement officials from carrying guns
By Jim Kouri

The attackers of two American federal agents while traveling in Mexico on Tuesday are believed to be members or associates of the Mexican crime gang Los Zetas, a confidential source told the Law Enforcement Examiner last Tuesday.

The two U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement special agents were assigned to the ICE Attaché office in Mexico City. They were shot in the line-of-duty while driving between Mexico City and Monterrey, Mexico, by unknown assailants.

Sadly, the two U.S law enforcement agents were prevented from protecting themselves by an antiquated U.S.-Mexican agreement that prohibits American cops from carrying firearms in Mexico even when visiting that crime-ridden country on official business.

According to Homeland Security officials, one agent - Jaime Zapata -- was critically wounded in the attack and died from his injuries. The second agent, who remains unidentified, was shot in the arm and leg and remains in stable condition.

Now that a federal agent has been murdered by a drug gang in Mexico, the Obama Administration promises to “look into” the crime-infested nation’s policy banning U.S. law enforcement officers from carrying weapons during official missions.

That, of course, means that the U.S. government deploys federal agents into Mexico’s most violent regions unarmed. This may seem inconceivable considering that heavily armed drug cartels have taken over chunks of the country and Uncle Sam must send its overwhelmed government help to combat the growing crisis.

In the last few years more than 34,000 murders have been associated with drug cartels and in 2010 serious crime connected to illicit narcotics operations hit record levels in scale and brutality.

More than 13,000 people were murdered across Mexico in disturbing and cruel ways not commonly seen in previous years, according to a report by a major newspaper in a border state. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton actually compared the drug-related violence in Mexico to a Colombia-style insurgency that devastated that South American nation a few decades ago.

In the aftermath of the vicious attack on the two ICE agents, Attorney General Erick Holder vowed to look into perhaps changing the policy forbidding American law enforcement officers from carrying guns in Mexico.

"We will look at this and we'll do . . . an analysis of what it is that we need to do to make sure that everybody is as safe down there as we can make them," Holder said during a news conference this week.

"Reading between the lines it’s probably best not to hold your breathe," said a statement from Judicial Watch, a public-interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption.

"Besides having around 30 ICE agents in Mexico, the U.S. has showered the country with more than $1 billion in the last few years to combat drug violence. The American tax dollars will keep pouring in under a multi-year program that also helps Central American nations, the Dominican Republic and Haiti fight crime. A disproportionate chunk of the cash goes to Mexico, however," said Judicial Watch officials on Thursday.

Jim Kouri, CPP, formerly Fifth Vice-President, is currently a Board Member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a columnist for and New Media Alliance ( In addition, he's a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB ( Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer and columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. Kouri appears regularly as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Fox News Channel, Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, etc.

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

Saturday, February 19, 2011

Mexican Armed Troops Conduct Vehicle Search On U.S. Soil!!

by TexasFred
From Randy’s Right: Mexican Armed Troops Conduct Vehicle Search On U.S. Soil!!
While Homeland Security is busy telling Americans to spy on each other and insisting that domestic extremists are a national security threat, a truck of twelve uniformed Mexican soldiers armed to the teeth brazenly violates national sovereignty to conduct searches of vehicles on U.S. soil.

The incursion was captured on surveillance footage taken at the Anzalduas International Bridge. The clip shows at least a dozen armed soldiers in Mexican military uniforms cross into U.S. territory at high speed.

“The vehicle travels down the bridge toward the U.S. Customs checkpoint. Its driver makes a U-turn just before reaching the lines of cars there. It then starts back south toward Mexico. The men pull over and search a vehicle for a few minutes then resume their trek south,” reports KRGV

Having spent around 10 minutes on U.S. soil conducting an impromptu search of a vehicle, including a search of the trunk of the car, the soldiers head back to Mexico.

The car that was searched then also heads south, confirming that it was traveling from the United States into Mexico, and raising the possibility that the Mexican soldiers had targeting American citizens for the search, not to mention the fact that they were agents of a foreign power exercising law enforcement duties inside the U.S., which would normally be sufficient to cause an international diplomatic spat in any other country.

However, when KRGV interviewed Chief Leo Longoria of the Mission Police Department, he defended the Mexican soldiers by saying they might have been unsure that they were crossing into the United States, before stating “we applaud their efforts”.

Longoria politely asked the soldiers to “coordinate those approaches, particularly coming into the United States,” failing completely to acknowledge that the action was an illegal violation of U.S. sovereignty.

Despite the video footage clearly documenting the fact that the Mexican troops crossed into U.S. territory, Mexican authorities lied to KRGV by insisting it didn’t happen.
This is by no means the first time that the Mexican military has violated the U.S. border to conduct operations on American soil.

On March 10 last year, residents of Falcon Heights, a south Texas border town, saw a Mexican helicopter hovering over a house shortly after 6pm. The chopper conducted surveillance for about 15 minutes before flying back to Mexico.

“They had armored individuals in the chopper, open ramp, very military looking, in style and preparation,” said Zapata County Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez Jr.

“It’s proof the Mexican military sees no boundaries,” reported local KRGV News’ Stephanie Stone, adding that the incident wasn’t the first of its kind and wouldn’t be the last.

“The markings I understand read ‘La Marina’ which is equivalent to the Mexican Navy,” said Gonzalez.

KRGV contacted nearly a dozen government agencies in an attempt to get answers. After contacting the the FAA about the chopper, KRGV were told to talk to the Customs and Border Protection, who said they knew about the incursion but were apparently unconcerned. State and local authorities refused to return phone calls about the incident after they were also contacted by KRGV.

“A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman says that a Mexican military helicopter crossed the border into south Texas late Wednesday afternoon before returning to Mexico without landing,” an Associated Press report later confirmed.
Mexican military helicopters invaded U.S. airspace at least three times last year, prompting Texas Congressman Ted Poe to make an official complaint during a speech in front of the House.

“The Federal Government is MIA on our borders. Our government ought to spend less time protesting States like Arizona, trying to protect their citizens from border violence, and start getting some answers from Mexico about their military helicopters flying into the United States,” said Poe.

In 2007, the U.S. Border Patrol warned its agents to look out for Mexican military units crossing into U.S. territory that could pose a threat to their lives.
It seems that the USA and Texas are not as safe as Janet Napolitano wants us to believe. Not that the entire Obama administration is a bunch of blithering IDIOTS, but, well, just sayin’.

Tags: Texas Fred, Mexican Troops, US Soil, searching vehicle, United States, video, corder security To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Yet Another Casualty in Trying to Protect Our Southern Border

Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA
On Tuesday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Jaime Zapata was killed while traveling from Mexico City to Monterrey. Drug dealers are suspected in the murder, and it is believed that the shooters knew they were firing upon a diplomatic vehicle. How much longer does this have to go on before the Obama administration gets serious? Not only is there a drug war at our doorsteps, these thugs are bringing it into the United States. How many more times will buildings on U.S. soil be riddled with bullets before our government actually does something?

Tags: Bobby Eberle, GOPUSA, borders, violence, murder, Jaime Zapata, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Colorado to give illegal aliens college tuition discounts?

By Jim Kouri/

At the same time as U.S. states such as Arizona are passing or pushing legislation for tougher immigration enforcement laws, one state is bucking the trend. Colorado officials are actually working to help illegal immigrants by offering them a taxpayer-funded benefit that should be reserved for legal U.S. residents and citizens.

Colorado legislators are reportedly on the verge of passing legislation to give illegal immigrants discounted in-state tuition at public colleges and universities. The measure has a good chance of passing the state’s Democrat-controlled Senate and could even make it through the Republican-led House, according Judicial Watch, a Washington, DC group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption.

Ironically, Colorado is the home state of one of the stalwarts of immigration enforcement and border security, former Congressman Tom Tancredo. 

Continue reading on


Jim Kouri, CPP, formerly Fifth Vice-President, is currently a Board Member of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and he's a columnist for and New Media Alliance ( In addition, he's a blogger for the Cheyenne, Wyoming Fox News Radio affiliate KGAB ( Kouri also serves as political advisor for Emmy and Golden Globe winning actor Michael Moriarty.

He's former chief at a New York City housing project in Washington Heights nicknamed "Crack City" by reporters covering the drug war in the 1980s. In addition, he served as director of public safety at a New Jersey university and director of security for several major organizations. He's also served on the National Drug Task Force and trained police and security officers throughout the country. Kouri writes for many police and security magazines including Chief of Police, Police Times, The Narc Officer and others. He's a news writer and columnist for AmericanDaily.Com, MensNewsDaily.Com, MichNews.Com, and he's syndicated by AXcessNews.Com. Kouri appears regularly as on-air commentator for over 100 TV and radio news and talk shows including Fox News Channel, Oprah, McLaughlin Report, CNN Headline News, MTV, etc.

Continue reading on Colorado to give illegal aliens college tuition discounts - National Law Enforcement |

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

Friday, February 18, 2011

Majority: States Should Enforce Immigration Laws If Feds Do No

Rasmussen Reports: In response to DOJ challenge to its effort to crack down on illegal immigration, Arizona has sued the federal government for failing to enforce immigration laws. Most voters continue to support Arizona’s new immigration law and strongly believe states should be able to fight illegal immigration if the federal government is not.

Survey Results:
- 67% of Likely U.S. Voters – two-out-of-three – think a state should have the right to enforce immigration laws if it believes the federal government is not enforcing them.
- 22% disagree and say states should not have that right.

Arizona is seeking reimbursement in its suit against the federal government:
- 49% federal government should reimburse states for expenses incurred as a result of illegal immigration.
- 30% government should not reimburse states - 21% are not sure.

Passage of an immigration law like Arizona’s in their own state;
- 57% of voters favor - 28% oppose such a law - 15% undecided
[Full Story]

Tags: Rasmussen Reports, immigration law, Arizona, AZ, states enforce laws, DOJ, illegal aliens, illegal immigration H/T ARRA News Service To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Amnesty Action Alert: "GRAHAM-NESTY"

The Washington establishment is as intent on passing amnesty disguised as “comprehensive immigration reform” as it was three years ago.

A group of US Senators, working with the full support of the White House, and the pro-amnesty, open-borders crowd, is once again pushing for so-called “comprehensive immigration reform” including granting amnesty to illegal aliens who broke the law coming to the United States and continue to break the law each and every day by staying.

The pro-amnesty establishment in Washington clearly doesn’t care about the more than 9,000 Americans who die each year at the hands of illegal aliens. If they did, laws would have been enforced long ago and our border would be secure.

And Washington doesn’t care about the hundreds of billions of dollars that has been spent on caring for, educating and subsidizing illegal aliens. Last month alone, Congress added more than $100 BILLION to our national debt.

Once again, it will be up to us – the American people – to stop amnesty for illegals in Washington.

Already the media has dubbed this new scourge “Grahamnesty” after chief proponent Lindsay Graham, US Senator from South Carolina. Illegal is illegal – and amnesty is amnesty.

Border security is a national security issue. It is an economic security issue. And it is an issue for each and every American. Please join BAN today by signing the CITIZEN’S PETITION AGAINST AMNESTY and help us expand our grassroots movement to stop these amnesty schemes from being reality.

We have won this battle before, and we can win it again. But only together!

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

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Chipotle Fires 450 Workers in Minn. After Immigration Probe

Fox Business, Fox News is reporting:
Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc (CMG) fired about 450 workers in Minnesota after an audit by U.S. immigration officials flagged questionable worker eligibility documents, the company said in a regulatory filing on Thursday.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] audited the company's Minnesota restaurants, which led to the dismissals mentioned above. The agency also is auditing employee documents from the fast-growing burrito chain's restaurants in Virginia and Washington, D.C.

"We have received additional requests for work authorization documents covering a small number of individual restaurants," the company said in the regulatory filing.

Chipotle spokesman Chris Arnold told Reuters in an email that the additional ICE requests were for restaurants in the areas already subject to document reviews.

In addition to Minnesota restaurants, Arnold said ICE is auditing "60 or so" restaurants in the Washington, D.C. and Virginia area. . . . Full Story

See Also: ICE auditing 1,000 more companies' hiring records

Tags: Fox Business, Fox News, Chipotle Mexican Grill , MN, fires, ICE, immigration probe, audit, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Arkansas Republican Congressmen Co-Sponsor Bill Stopping "Anchor Babies

ARRA News Service - Arkansas U.S. Representatives Steve Womack, Tim Griffin and Rick Crawford have joined 56 others as co-sponsors of Congressman Steve King of Iowa's bill, have signed onto immigration legislation seeking to halt the problem of so-called "anchor babies. They issued a joint statement, saying that automatic citizenship for a baby born in the U.S. to non-US parents encourages law-breaking and illegal immigration. All three Congressmen are veterans having served in the US Military.

The present issue of "anchor babies" is not an issue based in the Constitution as many people believe. The issue rests in a current law.  The King bill would change the present  law that recognizes that babies born on U.S. soil and not removed from the US are American citizen except for certain situations.  Situations like children born to parents residing temporarily in the United States but having an allegiance to another country. Imagine the children of a Communist leader visiting the US for a UN meeting or serving at their county's embassy being granted American citizenship just because their births happened to while they were in the United States.

A major problem has occurred with the significant numbers of illegal aliens entering this country illegally and then having babies in the U.S.  According to the Pew Hispanic Center, approximately 340,000 of the 4.3 million babies born in the United States in 2008 were the children of illegal aliens. The is also the problem of legal visitors entering our county for the purpose of having a baby.  Also, significant numbers of  visitors skip on their expired visas and do not returning to their home country.  Many reside illegally in the US and also have children. 

This bill if passed would still allow babies born in the US to be citizens by birth on American soil only if at least one of the baby's parents is a citizen, a legal permanent resident, or an alien resident who served in the U.S. armed forces.

Tags: Arkansas, US Representatives,Steve Womack, Tim Griffin, Rick Crawford, immigration legislation, Anchor babies, Steve King, Iowa, illegal aliens, illegal visitors To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

ICYMI: Illegal Alien Killer of Chandra Levy Only Gets 60 Years

Chandra Levy killer sentenced to 60 years in prison
February 11, 2011 12:19:22 PM

The man convicted of killing former federal intern Chandra Levy was sentenced to 60 years in prison Friday morning in D.C. Superior Court, putting an end to one of Washington's most sensational murder cases.

Ingmar Guandique, 29, an illegal immigrant from El Salvador, was convicted on November of two counts of first-degree felony murder, one related to Levy's kidnapping and the other related to an attempted robbery.

Full Story

Tags: kidnapping, robbery, murder, killer, Chandra Levy, Ingar Guandique, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Colo. GOP argues for 2 illegal immigration bills

NAEC - DENVER — Colorado Republican senators are pushing for proposals cracking down on illegal immigration, including one that would give police the authority to arrest crime suspects believed to be in the country illegally.
Two proposals will be heard in a Senate committee Wednesday afternoon to determine whether the measures will continue through the Legislature. Senate Bill 54 would give law enforcement broad authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants. Senate Bill 129 would require nongovernmental state employers to use the federal E-Verify program to confirm a worker's legal status.

The two bills are among several that Republicans have proposed this session targeting illegal immigration. A House bill that mimicked Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigration was killed Monday at the request of its sponsor.

Tags: Colorado, GOP, Illegal immigration, bills, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Monday, February 14, 2011

Arizona may require hospitals to check citizenship

MSNBC / AP Reporting that: Arizona lawmakers are trying to widen the state's illegal immigration crackdown with a proposal to require hospitals to confirm whether patients are in the country legally.

The National Conference of State Legislatures says it knows of no other states considering similar bills.

The proposal being heard late Monday by the Arizona Senate's judiciary committee would require hospitals to contact immigration authorities if a patient is an illegal immigrant.

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

Saturday, February 12, 2011

AZ Countersues Feds Over Illegal Immigration

Update as of 3/19/2010: This post was edited to remove the photo in the original story due to a complaint filed with Google by the referenced author. Note, the author did NOT contact us directly nor did the make a comment on the posted article.

In summary: The original article was provided by "The Fritch Show" via FaceBook to share with others. The author and "The Fritch Show" were given full credit and the original source is linked not once, but twice - at the beginning and at the end of the post. The author claims she was not given credit and that identified photo was personally copyrighted even though there was no indication below the photo in the post. This blog follows The Fair Use Doctrine (which can be read on the right hind side of this site) which permits us to display "Such material . . . to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law."

Regardless, due to the author's actions, we have opted to remove the photo because it ads little at this time to the educational value of the article other than it was visually relevant at the time of the post article. However, the article provided by the publisher, "The Fritch Show," remains under the guidelines of the Fair Use Doctrine. Click the link in the article to visit "The Fritch Show" and the originating article with its added updates.
More comments on the "chilling-effect" of this type of complaint may be posted in the future.

by Daniella Nicole, The Fritch Show: In 2010, the federal government announced it was filing a lawsuit against Arizona over SB 1070. During that time period, multiple lawsuits by states against the government have been reported on in regards to the healthcare act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

On February 10, 2011, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer announced a countersuit by Arizona against the federal government because of it’s failure to control the border and protect Arizona from the invasion of illegals. Other states have followed the example set by Arizona and have passed or are working on their own versions of SB 1070. This latest move by Arizona raises the question if, once again, other states will follow suit and file lawsuits against the federal government for it’s failure to enforce federal illegal immigration laws and failure to secure the borders. The federal government, as per usual, responded to the announcement of the Arizona countersuit by calling it “meritless” and as something that “does nothing to secure the border.”

In Utah, during a report regarding measures to be taken against illegals charged with crimes, it was noted that the regional director of ICE stated they would not be picking up or deporting any illegals charged with misdemeanor crimes. This is a clear violation of federal law because it is the purview of ICE to remove illegals from the country, whether they have been caught breaking other laws or not. This is only one of a number of examples of such behavior from ICE and the federal government.

If the argument against Arizona and other states taking illegal immigration enforcement action on their own is that only the federal government can legally deport anyone and enforce certain provisions of illegal immigration laws, the case can be strongly made that the federal government is knowingly and willfully violating its own laws when their response to the notification of the capture of illegals is to refuse to do anything about it.

Despite that, it is unclear what the result of winning a lawsuit against the federal government over its failure to act on the enforcement of illegal immigration laws would be, given the fact that the Obama administration has been found in contempt due to violating a court order to lift a ban on offshore oil drilling. In the case of the healthcare lawsuits, when ruled unconstitutional, the federal government simply appeals the decision.

This administration has made it very clear they have no respect for the Constitution or the laws of the land. Their action (and lack thereof) creates a strong argument for impeachment.  . . . [Full Story]

Tags: AZ, Arizona, lawsuit, Federals government, border control, jail costs, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Friday, February 11, 2011

New Mexico Special Driving Permits for Illegals Defeated

New Mexico lawmakers just narrowly defeated special driving permits for illegal aliens. From the comments of Governor Martinez's office, it would appear she is hearing us!

"I'm not concerned about what's popular with the Legislature. What's most important is what's popular with the public. And more than 80 percent of the public in New Mexico does not want to be issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants." -- NM Governor Susana Martinez (505-476-2200). [Source]

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

ICYMI; Radicals Promoting Illegal Immigration

H/T Inger Eberhart for the following prior articles:
Illegal immigration advocacy group director resorts to Alinsky tactic

May Day protestors in Atlanta demand an end to immigration enforcement

Tags: 287g, alinsky, Immigration, amnesty, illegal aliens, Georgia To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Wednesday, February 09, 2011

Missouri Ahead of the Game in Dealing with Illegal Immigrants

Ozarks Sentinal Editor's Note: The following appeared in our May 13 issue and is written by State Representative Nita Jane Ayres. Nita Jane Ayres has agreed to write a follow-up editorial which will appear in our print edition on June 24. The follow-up will take a close look at the state's legislation and how it deals with illegal immigrants.

We’re down to one week to go in the legislative session and bills are moving through the process at a remarkable pace. My goal is to keep you updated on all the pieces of legislation that may be of interest to you and your family. In the coming weeks, I hope to do that. However, this week I want to talk about an issue that Missouri has already addressed in a variety of ways – the issue of illegal immigration. I’m sure you’ve seen the headlines about Arizona’s new law aimed at dealing with those who enter our country illegally. It has been called the strictest immigration law in generations. While Missouri hasn’t gone to the same lengths as Arizona, our state has made significant policy changes that effectively deal with illegal immigrants who enter our state. Because of those changes, Missouri is ahead of the game when compared to many other states that are now dealing with this issue.

In 2007, the Missouri General Assembly approved HJR 7 to place on the ballot a proposed constitutional amendment designating English as the official language of Missouri. Voters then went to the polls and approved the measure with nearly 90 percent voting in favor. With that, English became the official language for all governmental proceedings in Missouri. It also means no individual has the right to demand government services in a language other than English. A common language is the cornerstone of a cohesive and united state and country. Ensuring that English is our official language is simply common sense.

Another measure that directly addresses the issue of illegal immigration was passed in 2008. HB 1549 requires our Highway Patrol and other law enforcement officials to verify the immigration status of any person arrested, and inform federal authorities if the person is found to be here illegally. It also allows Missouri law enforcement officers to receive training to enforce federal immigration laws. Furthermore, the bill makes it clear that illegal immigrants will not have access to taxpayer benefits such as food stamps and health care through MO HealthNet. With the passage of this legislation, Missouri sent a clear message that illegal immigrants are not welcome in our state, and that they are certainly not welcome to receive public benefits at the cost of Missouri taxpayers.

2009 saw another significant piece of legislation passed dealing with illegal immigration. HB 390 ensures Missouri’s public institutions of higher education do not award financial aid to individuals who are here illegally. The law also requires all postsecondary institutions of higher education to annually certify to the Missouri Department of Higher Education that they have not knowingly awarded financial aid to students who are unlawfully present in the United States. The bill represents another common sense approach to the issue as it ensures taxpayer dollars are not used to subsidize the education of someone who is in our country illegally.

So while Arizona has made national news for its new law, it’s important to remember Missouri has been proactive in addressing this growing problem. The laws we have on the books help ensure the rights and benefits of Missourians are preserved for actual Missouri citizens. It’s also important to remember that this country has always opened its arms to immigrants, which is why our nation is often referred to as the great melting pot. Immigrants from all parts of the world have helped make our country what it is today. However, our doors are not open to those who try to live in our country illegally. I believe Missouri’s laws make that very clear and give our law enforcement officials the authority they need to deal with the problem.

Thanks again for allowing me to represent you in the state capitol. Feel free to contact me with your concerns, suggestions and ideas. My office phone is 573-751-2492. Email address: Or write to: State Representative Nita Jane Ayres, House Post Office, State Capitol, Room 233-A, Jefferson City, MO 65101.

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

ICE Released Imprisoned Deportable Aliens, Convicted of Serious Crimes, Into U.S. in FY 2009

illegal immigrants deported
Photo of previously deported
illegal aliens to Mexico

By Edwin Mora,( Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) failed to identify more than 800 criminal alien convicts eligible for deportation before they were released from U.S. prisons, including “many” of  “the most egregious criminal aliens, who pose a significant pubic safety risk,” according to a report by the Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

According to the [DHS] report, released on Feb. 4, ICE’s Criminal Alien Program, or CAP, “is responsible for identifying criminal aliens incarcerated in federal, state, and local prisons and jails who are eligible for removal from the United States.”  In fiscal year 2009, CAP failed to identify 890 criminal aliens eligible for removal from the United States, according to the report. These criminals had been incarcerated in facilities in Texas and California and were released back into U.S. society.

A criminal alien eligible for removal is a person who is in the United States illegally and is subsequently convicted of a crime or was a legal permanent residents convicted of a removable offense, such as murder and other felonies. Once an alien is identified as removable, ICE issues a “detainer” for that individual, which notifies correctional facilities of “ICE’s intent to take custody of an individual in that facility for the purpose of instituting removal proceedings.”

According to the Immigration Policy Center, “If ICE does not take custody within 48 hours, the detainer automatically lapses, and the state/local law enforcement agency is required to release the individual.” ICE’s Criminal Alien Program is available at all state and federal prisons, in addition to more than 300 local jails throughout the country. ICE requested nearly $200 million for CAP in FY 2010, approximately $50 million more than it was allotted four years earlier.

The Inspector General (IG) report focused on cases involving alien inmates held in federal custody throughout the United States and in state custody in California, Texas, and New York. Those states hold about 64 percent of the foreign-borne U.S. inmate population. “ICE, through CAP, was successful in identifying 99% of the criminal aliens eligible for removal from the United States in federal custody during FY 2009,” the report stated.

“However, identification rates in two of the four states reviewed were not as high. ICE agents did not identify approximately 4% of criminal aliens eligible for removal in California and 2% in Texas.” The audit later added that the Texas and California FY 2009 rates of non-identified criminal aliens translate to “890 (262 federal and 628 state) out of a total population of 49,033.”

“Many of the 890 criminals are believed to have been Level 1 recidivist criminals,” the report added. “Level 1 are the most egregious criminal aliens, who pose a significant pubic safety risk.” Level 1 offenses, according to the report, include homicide, kidnapping, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault, threats, extortion, sex offenses, cruelty toward family, resisting an officer, illegal weapon possession, hit and run, and drug offenses accompanied by sentences of more than a year. . . .

ICE concurred with the IG report recommendations of conducting 100 percent screenings of all criminal aliens and enforcing the retention of all screenings and identifications of foreign-born inmates. “ICE estimates that 300,000 to 450,000 criminal aliens who are eligible for removal are detained each year at federal, state, and local correctional facilities,” the IG report stated.

Tags: IG Report, criminals, convicted felons, released, U.S., DHS, ICE, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

2 US Teens Killed in Mexico on Border

By Mark "Snooper" Harvey, Snooper Report: Three teenage boys were shot to death in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez over the weekend, at least two of them U.S. citizens and high school students in Texas, authorities said. The boys were killed at 4:22 p.m. Saturday while looking at cars in a dealership in the city across the border from El Paso, Texas, Chihuahua prosecutors' spokesman Arturo Sandoval said. One was found inside a white Jeep Cherokee and the other two in the courtyard. There were no leads on suspects or a motive, Sandoval said. Two managers were also in the dealership during the attack. One refused to give a statement, while the statement from the other manager was not released because of the pending investigation, Sandoval added. At least 60 bullet casings were found at the scene.

One of the boys, Carlos Mario Gonzalez Bermudez, 16, was a sophomore at Cathedral High School in El Paso, said Nick Gonzalez, the Roman Catholic brother who is the principal. Another victim, Juan Carlos Echeverri, 15, had been a freshman at the private all-boys Catholic school last year, but left to study in Ciudad Juarez, Gonzalez said. Both were U.S. citizens, he said. The U.S. Embassy in Mexico City said it could provide no immediate information on the case. The third teenager was identified as 17-year-old Cesar Yalin Miramontes Jimenez. The school principal said Gonzalez Bermudez mainly lived in Ciudad Juarez and commuted each day across the border. He said 20 percent of the 485 students enrolled at Cathedral are from Ciudad Juarez.

Tags: deaths, shooting, teenagers, Americans, Mexico, border, amnesty, Ciudad Juarez, crime, Mexican border To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Monday, February 07, 2011

Rasmussen Reports: Federal Govt Encourages Illegal Immigration

Rasmussen Reports:  Most voters continue to believe that the policies of the federal government encourage illegal immigration, but voters are now almost evenly divided over whether it's better to let the federal government or individual states enforce immigration laws.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters think the policies and practices of the federal government encourage illegal immigration, comparable to findings in October 2009 . . .   Twenty-one percent (21%) disagree and say the federal government does not encourage illegal immigration through its actions, but another 22% aren't sure.

Forty-seven percent (47%) say relying on the federal government to enforce immigration laws is a better approach than allowing individual states to act on their own to enforce them. Forty-four percent (44%) take the opposite view and say the better approach is to allow states to enforce immigration laws, but that's down 11 points from September. . . . [Full Article]

Tags: Rasmussen Reports, federal government, promotes illegal immigration, illegal aliens, illegals To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Sunday, February 06, 2011

Three States Openly Give Licenses To Illegal Aliens

In the U.S., the drivers license is our de facto universal identification card. Yet many states do not thoroughly verify applicants' identities. Thanks to the work of many people in their states, only three states continue to openly give licenses to illegal aliens although 77% of Americans oppose the practice.

These licenses are threshold documents which are then used to steal American taxpayer resources, jobs, and classroom seats from innocent Americans and legal immigrants. These licenses become "breeder documents" which allow the recipient to obtain additional documents, based upon the false premise that he is a U.S. citizen. For example, all of the 9/11 hijackers had driver's licenses or state-issued non-driver's identification cards, which they then could use when opening bank accounts, renting housing, and boarding planes.

The three states that are acting as document mills for the illegal alien invasion of America are New Mexico (NM), Utah (UT), and Washington (WA). Stopping all non emergency taxpayer benefits for illegal aliens, such as licenses, is essential to reversing illegal immigration.

One of the arguments in favor of issuing drivers licenses to illegal aliens is that it will make our roads safer. This is not likely, as someone who has broken U.S. law to come here will most likely continue to break our laws - including traffic laws - and to drive without insurance and to obtain "breeder" licenses under false names.

Tags: drivers license, New Mexico, NM, Utah, UT, Washington, WA, illegal aliens, taxpayer benefits To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Saturday, February 05, 2011

E-Verify Efforts In States Are Even More Critical As Pew Study Reveals 8 Million Illegal Aliens Still Hold U.S. Jobs

by Chris Chmielenski, NumbersUSA: All federal and state enforcement efforts against illegal immigration the last year failed to reduce the number of illegal aliens holding U.S. jobs and keeping unemployed Americans from having them, according to a Pew Hispanic Center study released this week.

In the few states that have seriously implemented their own mandatory E-Verify laws, the number of illegal aliens has declined. But the annual count of illegal aliens by Pew indicated that the illegal foreign workers are mainly moving to lax-enforcement states and taking jobs there. Thus, the number of jobs held nationally by illegal aliens remained steady at 8 million.

The answer, of course, is to make E-Verify mandatory nationally (through Congress) or greatly increase the number of states doing so. But time is running out in several states as their short legislature session head to a close for the year.

Yesterday, a Kentucky House committee approved a mandatory E-Verify bill, but there's still a lot of work to be done in the Bluegrass State and many other states across the country.

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

Thursday, February 03, 2011

From The Archives - "A Plan to Destroy America"

Richard D. Lamm
The following speech* was given by former Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamm (D 1975 – 1987) at the 2004 Immigration-Overpopulation Conference in Washington, D.C. He titled it "A Plan to Destroy America."

I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, let’s destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizens think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that “an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide.” Here is my plan:

1. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: “The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons and Corsicans.”

2. I would then invent “multiculturalism” and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the black and Hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.

3. We can make the United States a “Hispanic Quebec” without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently, “The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved, not by tolerance, but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together.” I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences, rather than Americans emphasizing their similarities.

4. Having done all this, I would make our fastest-growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50 percent dropout rate from school.

5. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority. I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.

6. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would “celebrate diversity.” “Diversity” is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other–that is, when they are not killing each other. A “diverse,” peaceful or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia.

Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf’s “World History” tells us: “The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic Games in honor of Zeus, and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy, Persia, threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors … (local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions …)” If we can put the emphasis on the “pluribus,” instead of the “unum,” we can balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.

7. Then I would place all these subjects off-limits–make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to “heretic” in the 16th century that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like “racist”, “xenophobe” halt argument and conversation. Having made America a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of “victimology,” I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra –”because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good.” I would make every individual immigrant sympatric and ignore the cumulative impact.

8. Lastly, I would censor Victor Davis Hanson’s book “Mexifornia” – this book is dangerous; it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please–if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed–please, please–don’t buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.

* The above speech has also been passed around the internet by email over the last seven years. It has become almost a legend. But in fact, it has been confirmed as true.

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

Wednesday, February 02, 2011

New Mexico Gov. Martinez Orders End to 'Sanctuary State' Policies

Susana Martinez Stand With Arizona: (Albuquerque, NM - January 31, 2011) New Mexico governor Susana Martinez (R) said Monday that New Mexico is no longer an illegal immigrant sanctuary state, issuing an order to officially reverse the state's status. Ms. Martinez ordered the reversal of the state's "sanctuary status" - put in place by former Gov. Bill Richardson (D), which prohibited law enforcement from asking criminal suspects about their citizenship. The move aligns the state with Arizona, which passed a law mandating officials inquire about an individual's immigration status.

You know she did the right thing by watching this hilariously biased news report, as well as the panicked response of the state's illegal alien advocates. God bless you, Governor Susana Martinez!

The full press release and Executive Order:
State of New Mexico
Office of the Governor

Susana Martinez

Contact: Scott Darnell

For Immediate Release January 31, 2011


SANTA FE – Governor Susana Martinez announced today that she has signed an executive order rescinding sanctuary status for illegal immigrants who commit crimes in New Mexico while protecting victims and witnesses of criminal acts. The order signed by Governor Martinez directs law enforcement officers to inquire about the immigration status of those who are arrested for committing crimes.

“This order takes the handcuffs off of New Mexico’s law enforcement officers in their mission to keep our communities safe,” said Governor Martinez. “The criminal justice system should have the authority to determine the immigration status of all criminals, regardless of race or ethnicity, and report illegal immigrants who commit crimes to federal authorities. Meanwhile, it is important that we safeguard the ability of victims and witnesses to report crimes to law enforcement officers without fear of repercussion.”

Full text of the executive order:


WHEREAS, the State of New Mexico has a diverse population, including legal immigrants from many countries, whose contributions to the community are vital and from which the State of New Mexico greatly benefits; and

WHEREAS, it is essential that victims of, and witnesses to, crime are able to report those crimes and that they be assured access to our criminal justice system without fear of deportation or other immigration consequences; and

WHEREAS, Executive Order 2005-019 established a “sanctuary” policy that prohibited state law enforcement officers from inquiring about a criminal suspect’s immigration status; and

WHEREAS, this policy offers a shield to those who are arrested for committing crimes and are in this country illegally; and

WHEREAS, it is not the responsibility of state law enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration laws; however, in compliance with their sworn duties to uphold all laws, state law enforcement officers shall cooperate and communicate with federal authorities; and

WHEREAS, when a person, regardless of race, is arrested for a crime, state law enforcement officers shall inquire into the criminal suspect’s immigration status, and report relevant information to federal immigration enforcement authorities;

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Susana Martinez, Governor of the State of New Mexico, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the State of New Mexico, do hereby ORDER and DIRECT:

1. Executive Order 2005-019 is rescinded and this Executive Order shall supersede it;

2. State law enforcement officers shall not inquire about the immigration status of crime victims, witnesses, or others who call or approach law enforcement seeking assistance or reporting a crime; and

3. State law enforcement officers shall inquire into the criminal suspect’s immigration status, and report relevant information to federal immigration enforcement authorities.

THIS ORDER supersedes any other previous orders, proclamations, or directives to the extent they are in conflict. This Executive Order shall take effect immediately.





Tags: New Mexico, Governor, Susana Martinez, sanctuary cities, illegal aliens To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!

Tuesday, February 01, 2011

Biz Lobbyists Try To Stop State E-Verify Laws, Claiming 'Burden' To Business -- Here Is Why They Are Wrong

By Roy Beck, NumbersUSA: Hundreds of state legislators across the country this winter are trying to put their unemployed residents back to work by passing mandatory E-Verify laws. Their main obstacle is business lobbyists claiming such laws would "burden" employers, and that federal courts might overturn the laws.

As you help these E-Verify efforts in your states, please read NumbersUSA's legal brief below on why the business lobbyists are wrong.

View our map showing all the states that require E-Verify in one form or another -- and all the states that have legislation pending.

We regard these state E-Verify battles as among the most important this year as ways to put millions of unemployed Americans back to work by opening up many of the 7 million jobs now held by illegal aliens in construction, service, manufacturing and transportation.

It is important to remember that:
  • Arizona's mandatory E-Verify law was upheld by the federal District Court that first heard it.
  • It was also upheld by the federal Court of Appeals.
  • But the Supreme Court agreed to review the findings after the Obama Administration joined the Chamber of Commerce in trying to kill the Arizona E-Verify law. We are awaiting a Supreme Court ruling.
  • One-quarter of all new hires are now having to go through E-Verify. If several more states pass mandatory laws, we can approach half of all new hires, at which point we can hope that national business organizations will decide it is better to have a uniform mandatory E-Verify law for the whole nation and stop blocking it in the U.S. Congress.

Below is the the part of the amicus brief we filed with the U.S. Supreme Court that deals with one of the business lobbies' chief contentions for stopping ALL states from requiring E-Verify.
I have interspersed my own comments in this typography. You can pick up the overall thrust of the legal arguments by reading all the sentences I have highlighted in red. But I provide all of the argument, as well as the footnotes, for those of you who find yourselves arguing with elected officials, their staff and journalists.

(Section II of Amicus filed by NumbersUSA in U.S. Supreme Court) Petitioners contend that Arizona’s law requiring use of the federal E-Verify employment authorization system is “impliedly preempted.”
When you see "Petitioners" used, that refers to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce which sued to overturn Arizona's mandatory E-Verify law.
The courts below rejected this argument, noting that Congress could, but did not, provide for an express preemption of state laws requiring participation in E-Verify. Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc., 558 F.3d at 866-67. The Ninth Circuit noted that the existence of the savings clause demonstrates that Congress did not intend to foreclose participation in E-Verify, and the legislative history indicates that Congress was instead intending to encourage use of the system. Id. at 867.
In other words, if Congress had intended to prevent states from passing E-Verify laws, it wouldn't have provided an exception for when they could actually do so. See my blog earlier this month about the exception that allows states to use business licenses as a way to require employers to use E-Verify.
The Petition (although not explained in terms of governing precedent) apparently intended this as a conflict preemption claim. Petitioners’ Br., at 51 (“conflicts with the language, structure, and intent of federal immigration law”).

Conflict preemption occurs when either “compliance with both federal and state regulations is a physical impossibility,” Fla. Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142-43 (1963), or where “state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress,” Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 67 (1941)). “[O]ur task of statutory construction must in the first instance focus on the plain wording of the clause, which necessarily contains the best evidence of Congress' preemptive intent.” Sprietsma v. Mercury Marine, 537 U.S. 51, 62-63 (2002). To meet the conflict preemption requirements the state law must mirror the federal objectives (stopping employment of unauthorized aliens) AND should further a legitimate state goal (protecting the economy of the state) BUT may not obstruct the original Congressional intent.

With what congressional intent do the Arizona laws interfere?

Here Petitioners suggest that Congress intended to “avoid imposing serious burdens on employers.” (Petitioners’ Br., at 48.)

Other than “erroneous tentative nonconfirmations” of authorizations to work for certain foreign-born persons, Petitioners do not offer any specific reasons why they feel a mandatory E-Verify program would be burdensome to employers. No specific reason was offered at trial.

This assertion of conflict, then, is about employer burden.

In denying a preliminary injunction early in the case, the District Court expressly rejected Petitioner’s “employer burden” argument. (Ariz. Contractors Ass’n v. Napolitano, Nos. CV07-1355-PHX-NVW, CV07-1684-PHX-NVW, Dec. 21, 2007, 2007 WL 4570303, at *6-7.)

Petitioners’ theory that Congressional intent was to avoid a burden on business is also inconsistent with the history of E-Verify and the reality of E-Verify.
Contrary to Petitioners’ theory, the mandatory system was not intended to “burden” employers. It was intended to help them.

Petitioners begin their history of E-Verify with the 1996 legislation, rather than looking at the entire history of federal consideration of electronic employment authorization verification systems. The full legislative history of E-Verify, in fact, shows exactly the opposite of Petitioners’ theory: Congress felt that a mandatory electronic verification system would both be less burdensome to employers and less likely to give rise to discriminatory conduct.

E-Verify, in its earliest form, was promoted as a telephone-based verification system for Social Security numbers, similar to that used by merchants to verify credit card transactions. (See, e.g., Exec. Order 12781 (Nov. 20, 1981) (authorizing INS to conduct alternative employment verification programs).
NumbersUSA has always argued that our priority of mandating E-Verify use for every employer and for every employee is because we are PRO-business. The fact that surveys find that businesses that use E-Verify overwhelmingly give it high marks shows that we are favoring law-abiding, civic-responsibility businesses by wanting to mandate it for all.
During the 1984 debate over H.R. 1510, an earlier version of IRCA, the House of Representatives adopted Cong. Sam Hall’s amendment to require a mandatory telephone employment authorization verification system. 130 Cong. Rec. H 5651-5658 (June 12, 1984). Cong. Hall’s system was based on credit card verification systems of the time. (Id., at H5651, H5654.)

Hall was an avowed opponent of “employer sanctions.” 130 Cong. Rec. H5651 (Statement of Cong. Sam Hall). He believed a mandatory system of employment authorization verification would help, not burden, employers: “A call-in system such as I propose in this amendment, however, relieves employers of a verification role.” Id. Other opponents agreed: “it is my understanding that the sole purpose of this amendment is to protect the employer.” Id., at H5656 (Statement of Cong. Roybal).

In addition, the mandatory telephone verification system was viewed by opponents of employer sanctions as an important anti-discrimination measure. “I think what the gentleman from Texas [Cong. Hall] is offering is a way to verify the legal right to work without discrimination, and it removes the onus from the employer.” Id., at H5655-56 (Statement of Cong. Martinez). Proponents of the bill agreed. Id., at H5657-58 (Statement of Cong. John McCain) (“such a system would remove any possible incentive an employer had to discriminate against potential employees.”).
Another of our arguments for mandatory E-Verify has always been that it REMOVES discrimination possibilities. If you have to run it on every single employee, it doesn't matter what you look like, talk like or seem like. It is just as difficult for a white, English-speaking illegal alien from Canada to get a job through E-Verify as it is for a dark-skinned, broken-English-speaking LEGAL immigrant from Mexico to be turned down for a job through E-Verify.
The Senate, however, which had been more skeptical of the need for anti-discrimination measures,1 rejected the Hall mandatory verification amendment. Instead the Senate adopted Sen. Lawton Chiles’ amendment providing for a study of a computerized verification system. 130 Cong. Rec. S11448 (Sept. 13, 1985) (Amdt. 609) (statements of Sens. Simpson and Simon). Then the Senate adopted Sen. Patrick Moynihan’s amendment of a similar study of a computer-readable and employer-verifiable Social Security card. Id., at S. 11450 (Amdt 610).

The statements of IRCA’s chief architect, Senator Simpson, confirm that equal application to all employers was the most important anti-discrimination provision. Responding to concerns that repeat violators will never “hire anybody again who looks foreign,” Simpson stated:
"We are asking here for the citizens of America and noncitizens and those who are authorized to work to present a document…[The document requirement] says you are legal to work and that document is not intrusive…It is presented at the time of new hire employment and it is presented by people who “look foreign” and by bald Anglo skinny guys like me, too. Anything else and you would truly have discrimination. That is the issue. I have been through that one plenty of times, and it is extraordinary to me to think that the issue of employers being the policemen of the country, that one went out the window a long time ago. If we do not ask employers of America to handle our withholding tax, who would?...We have penalties against those employers who choose not to do that. That is what we are talking about." (132 Cong. Rec. 33223 (1986); see also H.R. Rep. No. 99-682(I), at 45-46.)
Nothing in the debates on this change indicated any concern that a mandatory system would impose “serious burdens on employers.” Petitioners’ Br., at 48.
The major reason for dropping the mandatory verification requirement passed by the House and instead requiring only a study was the projected cost. “To implement such a system without knowing whether it would work would be expensive. A study would clarify that.” (Id., at S 11448 (Statement of Sen. Simpson).

The legislative history, coupled with the express preemption analysis in the courts below, suggests that Congress was not concerned about mandatory E-Verify “imposing serious burdens on employers.” Petitioners’ Br., at 48. There is no evidence that requiring use of E-Verify would obstruct congressional intent to stop the hiring of unauthorized aliens. There is no “clear and manifest” evidence that Congress intended to preempt any state-level attempts to require the use of E-Verify.

Even if there were such a Congressional intent, the facts show that E-Verify is anything but a burden. Rather it potentially replaces the more burdensome mandatory paper I-9 system. The E-Verify system is an effective and uniform means of combating unauthorized hires, thus furthering the intent of Congress. More than 216,000 employers are enrolled in the free E-Verify program, with over 8.7 million queries run through the system in fiscal year 2009.2 There have been over 13 million queries run through the system in fiscal year 2010 (as of July 31, 2010). Id. The expansive database of over 455 million records in the Social Security Administration database provided by the government allows employers greater ability to ensure that their hires are authorized to work in the United States. Id.

An evaluation of the E-Verify system during 2008 found that 96% of all E-Verify cases received a correct initial finding.3 Of all E-Verify queries in 2008, only 3.3% returned a false positive for an unauthorized worker, mainly due to the difficulties in detecting unauthorized aliens who used identity theft in order to obtain a job.4
Our amicus statement notes that E-Verify is not yet able to detect all illegal aliens. But that certainly is not a burden on business. It just means that using it would keep prevent the hiring of most of the illegal aliens who now are able to hold jobs and keep them out of the hands of unemployed Americans and legal immigrants.
While issues remain in the effectiveness of E-Verify to detect all unauthorized aliens who use identity theft or documents of authorized workers in order to get a job, the traditional paper I-9 system alone is far less reliable in detecting these attempts. Without E-Verify, the likelihood of employers detecting fraudulent documents varies on a wide variety of factors including the quality of the documents, the employers’ familiarity with immigration and other documents, and their expertise in detecting fraudulent documents. (Findings of the E-Verify Evaluation Program, note 8, at 131.) The E-Verify system adds an extra step and cross references these documents with information in the SSA database to determine the veracity. Id. As a result, the E-Verify system detects nearly all unauthorized aliens who attempt to use counterfeit documents or make false claims in their job applications.5

In order to address the identity theft issue, the government is working to improve the E-Verify system so that it can be more effective in catching unauthorized workers who try to gain employment through identity theft. The E-Verify program includes a Photo Tool that allows employers to view photographs in the database of workers presenting USCIS-issued permanent residence (“green”) cards and employment authorization documents. Thus, the employer can view the photo that is on file with these documents and compare them to the documents offered by the applicant. (Westat Evaluation of the E-Verify Program: USCIS Synopsis of Key Findings and Program Implications, note 9, at 7 (“Westat Findings”). By matching photograph in the E-Verify program with the identification the worker presents, the employer can confirm that the document has not been altered. This feature has vetted over 300,000 photos with employers and detected more than 1,000 instances of fraudulent immigration documents. Id. This year, USCIS is adding visa photographs to the database and is working with states to include driver’s license photographs as well. (Id. at 8.) As the system continues to improve, it will be harder for unauthorized workers to cheat the system.

The level of burden to those businesses using the more accurate E-Verify pales in comparison to the burden to businesses using I-9 with its low level of accuracy. One of the greatest “burdens” on businesses occurs when unauthorized workers have been found in their workplaces. Even if the businesses avoid the penalties for hiring unauthorized workers, the cost to the business due to the disruption of the workplace and the retraining of new hires is far greater. In the face of these costs the temptation to avoid employing all persons who appear to be immigrants is great.

Which brings us to a real burden: the burden to workers who are discriminated against because employers know the I-9 paper documentation is not a reliable system.

It is clear that the E-Verify system helps prevent employer discrimination of potential hires. E-Verify allows employers to simply enter information that is provided by the potential hire’s I-9 forms into the E-Verification, where it is cross-referenced against the government’s vast database to verify the legality of the hire.
(E-Verify, note 7.) The online system removes any biases or prejudicial notions a reviewing employer may hold against a potential hire by taking the verification process out of their hands. The database does not care about ethnicity, appearance or accent of a potential hire, it merely evaluates whether the individuals paperwork is in order. That takes the discretion, and thus the opportunity for discrimination, out of the process. This is exactly what Congress intended in 1983, when it considered the effect of an electronic verification system. 130 Cong. Rec. H5651 (Statement of Cong. Hall).

In addition, DHS will report to the DOJ instances where there is evidence an employer used E-verify for discriminatory purposes.6 Furthermore, 17% of businesses stated that they were more likely to hire foreign born workers after implementing E-Verify, as opposed to only 2% of businesses who had a decreased willingness to hire foreign born workers after implementing the system. (Westat Findings, Note 8, at 206.)

E-Verify also provides for the rights of the applicant to challenge the findings of the E-Verify system.7 If an applicant’s paperwork is not consistent, the USCIS will ask the employer to verify the information to rule out human error. If human error is ruled out, then a tentative nonconfirmation finding (TNC) will be issued. Id. Employers must allow workers time to contact Social Security or DHS to cure any problems with the workers’ records. Id. Employers who act against a worker earlier can be fined by the Department of Justice for a civil rights violation.8

The more E-Verify is used, the more effective the system will become. “As it becomes harder to obtain fraudulent documents that will not be detected by E-Verify, the cost of such documents will presumably increase. Therefore, an important deterrent value of the Program ultimately may be to increase the cost of obtaining unauthorized employment, which, in turn, would cause some reduction in unauthorized employment.” Westat Findings, Note 8, at 141. The study also noted that there is evidence for unauthorized aliens to avoid employers who use E-Verify out of a fear of being identified as an unauthorized worker. Id. Therefore the more businesses that use E-Verify, the more of a deterrent it will become to prevent unauthorized hires. Arizona’s decision to require businesses to use E-Verify will fulfill the intent of Congress to reduce unauthorized labor.

It appears that Petitioners have misjudged what was Congressional intent in making E-Verify voluntary. Employers can comply with E-Verify, and Congress seemed to want them to do so. The Arizona law is not preempted.

1 “The Committee does not believe that such discrimination will occur.” S. Rep. 99-132, at 9.
2 Dept. of Homeland Security, E-Verify, (last visited Oct. 26, 2010).
3 Westat, Findings of the E-Verify Evaluation Program, (Dec. 2009)
4 United States Citizenship and Immigration Servs., Westat Evaluation of the E-Verify Program: USCIS Synopsis of Key Findings and Program Implications, 6 (Jan. 28, 2010)
5 James Edwards, E-Verify, Setting the Record Straight, (last visited Oct. 26, 2010) (noting that of the 6.2% of cases involving unauthorized workers, approximately half were falsely given work authorization due to the use of documents in identity theft).
6 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servs., DHS Unveils Initiatives to Enhance E-Verify, (last visited Oct. 26, 2010).
7 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servs., Resolving a Tenative Nonconfirmation, (last visited Oct. 26, 2010).
8 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Servs., Reporting Violations, (last visited Oct. 26, 2010).
(C) NumbersUSA May be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA.

Tags: Numbers USA, Roy Beck, e-verify, illegal aliens, lobbyist To share the post, click on "Post Link." Please mention / link to Blogs for Borders. Thanks!