Sunday, July 29, 2007

The Fourth Amendment

Do we really want to become a show me your papers society?

I'm a landlord and dealing with all the other regulations the last thing I want to do is check somebody's immigration status. I'm not qualified to to that and neither are the property owners of Hazleton.

Let's remember how this came about. Rick Santorum was looking for a campaign issue last year and put Barletta up to writing this ridiculous law. Two of his people set up the Small Town Defender site. Now it has taken on a life of it's own that just may bankrupt the taxpayers of Hazleton. Very few appeals are succesful in the 3rd Circuit . And I doubt if the Supreme Court will even hear it if it gets past that.

Back to the 4th:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Believe it not everybody in the United States has rights. From the comments:

There are many solutions to the immigration problems that do not require the destruction of the bedrock of our great republic. The answers is NOT for local municipalities to ignore the U.S. Constitution. The answer is NOT to harass legal immigrants and naturalized citizens because of the color of their skin or accent in their speech. Is it just, is it proper to tell people to come to our country and follow our rules, but not provide them the protection of our laws? Do we tell the legal immigrants and naturalized citizens --If you come here legally and take the steps to become a citizen you will be subject to unreasonable search and seizure, you can be stopped any time and asked to produce your papers? If you want to buy a donut you have to show ID? If you need emergency medical care, we will only save your life if you can provide documentation? It is cliche but 2 wrongs don't make a right. This not about political correctness. This is about the bedrock of our republic, we are a nation of laws, those laws are based upon the U.S. Constitution, if the Constitution has no meaning then our laws have no meaning. Immigration enforcement is the role of the executive branch of our federal government. It is up to us to elect those who do their job and enforce our laws, If they do not then we must make a change through the elective process. I as much as anyone wants us to control our borders, I want us to stem the tide of illegal immigration. But I also want us to protect the rights o those who followed the laws to come here the right way. I want us to protect the rights of those who took the steps and worked towards becoming naturalized citizens. I do not want those who followed the rules, obeyed the laws and actually studied and worked to earn their citizenship to become collateral damage in one man's pursuit of higher office. It is so easy to toss aspersions and blame at those who don't look like us, who don't speak like us. It is easy cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war. It is much more difficult to follow the laws, follow the constitution and defend democracy. The Pledge of Allegiance ends with, "and liberty and justice for all." not for all those who speak in perfect english, not for all those whose skin color is an identical match. Illegal immigration is a problem much deeper than a catch phrase. It will take serious deliberate people who love their country and their republic more than their ambitions to solve the problem.


the much maligned anonymous poster said...

Instead of taking a thoughtful leadership role Lou Barletta has chosen to play on fears. There are genuine solutions within the structure of our Constitution. If Lou had taken the sound rational approach and realized that what he was doing was not going to pass muster, and parlayed his national exposure into a solid lobbying organization to pressure congress and the president to enact and enforce he would have kept his profile high and he may have actually gotten something done. Also he would have demonstrated that he has a grasp of the Constitution, of U.S. Gov't and it would have made him a very attractive candidate for higher office. Unfortunately he either doesn't have a full grasp of the Constitution or he has chosen the path of least resistance, (hate and fear mongering), I think it is both.
When Lou ran against Kanjorski before, the TL endorsement board question his grasp of the issues. Nothing has changed in the intervening years to change that perception. This is a classic example. The fact is this IS a complicated issue, and trying to boil it down into a madison Ave. slogan is disrespectful to those of us who are able to think in more than one sentence at time. And either Lou fits into the simple category or he disrespects the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

murder in hazelton, but it wasn't done by an illegal immigrant. i see on 16's web site it appears to be an africian american. will barletta get a new law on the books?