Imagine for a moment that a pack of strangers – ranging from hooligans to plain homeless – illegally entered your home and started raiding the pantry, stealing your possessions, stuffing up the toilets, and sleeping on your bed.  When you call the police to come down and remove them, you are told they cannot assist you because they lack the power to profile the unwanted guests from other members of the household.  As desperation sets in, you join with your neighbors to chase them out.  Much to your chagrin, lawyers for the intruders impel the courts to issue a ‘cease and desist order,’ obstructing efforts to deny the intruders anything, including the twinkies in the pantry.  Moreover, teams of advocates for these brazen burglars begin to record the contact information of those locals who desire to stop the illegal entries.

Sound absurd and perverse?  Does it remind you of Sodom and Gomorrah?

Welcome to the reality of our immigration system.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a legal system that allows any affluent organization to immediately halt efforts of state governments to deal with their illegal immigration problem; encumbering those laws in years’ worth of frivolous legal proceedings.  There is something fundamentally perverse when the man entrusted with enforcing those laws can malevolently supplant the core laws governing our sovereignty – and face no threat of legal action.

Here are just a few recent news tidbits that exemplify the reprehensible and dyslexic actions of various branches of government toward our vital immigration laws:

Read More →

The Supreme Court has upheld Arizona’s Legal Arizona Workers Act. That law allows the state to shut down businesses that hire illegal immigrants:

A recently enacted Arizona statute—the Legal Arizona Workers Act—provides that the licenses of state employers that knowingly or intentionally employ unauthorized aliens may be, and in certain circumstances must be, suspended or revoked. The law also requires that all Arizona employers use a federal electronic verification system to confirm that the workers they employ are legally authorized workers. The question presented is whether federal immigration law preempts those provisions of Arizona law. Because we conclude that the State’s licensing provisions fall squarely within the federal statute’s savings clause and that the Arizona regulation does not otherwise conflict with federal law, we hold that the Arizona law is not preempted.

The high court’s majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts rejected Obama administration arguments that the Arizona law conflicted with federal immigration law:

• Arizona’s licensing law falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the States and therefore is not expressly preempted.

• The state law requires no more than that an employer, after hiring an employee, “verify the employment eligibility of the employee” through E-Verify.

• Arizona’s requirement that employers use E-Verify in no way obstructs achieving the aims of the federal program. In fact, the Government has consistently expanded and encouraged the use of E-Verify, and Congress has directed that E-Verify be made available in all 50 States.

This is a huge win for those trying to do something about the never-ending flow of illegal aliens across our southern border. It is a huge loss for President Obama who will no doubt use it to continue to demonize the Supreme Court and rally his supporters for his reelection battle.

As Governor Pawlenty has pointed out, it is good to see that Justice Elena Kagen properly recused herself from participating in this ruling because of her previous position as President Obama’s Solicitor General. That is a precedent she must also follow when ObamaCare is presented before the court.

You can read the decision (pdf) here.

The Supreme Court has upheld Arizona’s Legal Arizona Workers Act. That law allows the state to shut down businesses that hire illegal immigrants:

A recently enacted Arizona statute—the Legal Arizona Workers Act—provides that the licenses of state employers that knowingly or intentionally employ unauthorized aliens may be, and in certain circumstances must be, suspended or revoked. The law also requires that all Arizona employers use a federal electronic verification system to confirm that the workers they employ are legally authorized workers. The question presented is whether federal immigration law preempts those provisions of Arizona law. Because we conclude that the State’s licensing provisions fall squarely within the federal statute’s savings clause and that the Arizona regulation does not otherwise conflict with federal law, we hold that the Arizona law is not preempted.

The high court’s majority opinion written by Chief Justice John Roberts rejected Obama administration arguments that the Arizona law conflicted with federal immigration law:

• Arizona’s licensing law falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the States and therefore is not expressly preempted.

• The state law requires no more than that an employer, after hiring an employee, “verify the employment eligibility of the employee” through E-Verify.

• Arizona’s requirement that employers use E-Verify in no way obstructs achieving the aims of the federal program. In fact, the Government has consistently expanded and encouraged the use of E-Verify, and Congress has directed that E-Verify be made available in all 50 States.

This is a huge win for those trying to do something about the never-ending flow of illegal aliens across our southern border. It is a huge loss for President Obama who will no doubt use it to continue to demonize the Supreme Court and rally his supporters for his reelection battle.

As Governor Pawlenty has pointed out, it is good to see that Justice Elena Kagen properly recused herself from participating in this ruling because of her previous position as President Obama’s Solicitor General. That is a precedent she must also follow when ObamaCare is presented before the court.

You can read the decision (pdf) here.

The so-called backdoor amnesty for illegal aliens is no longer merely another bad idea from the Obama administration. According to the Houston Chronicle, the Department of Homeland Security is trying to dismiss thousands of deportation cases against “suspected illegal immigrants.”

The Chronicle reports the Obama amnesty effort began “about a month ago” in Houston, where the Department of Homeland Security now has five attorneys working full-time on this backdoor amnesty for illegal aliens. The amnesty program is expected to be rolled out nationwide soon.

Senator John Cornyn blasted the Obama amnesty:

This situation is just another side effect of President Obama’s failure to deliver on his campaign promise to make immigration reform a priority in his first year. Until he does, state and local authorities are left with no choice but to pick up the slack for prosecuting and detaining criminal aliens.

Read More →

The so-called backdoor amnesty for illegal aliens is no longer merely another bad idea from the Obama administration. According to the Houston Chronicle, the Department of Homeland Security is trying to dismiss thousands of deportation cases against “suspected illegal immigrants.”

The Chronicle reports the Obama amnesty effort began “about a month ago” in Houston, where the Department of Homeland Security now has five attorneys working full-time on this backdoor amnesty for illegal aliens. The amnesty program is expected to be rolled out nationwide soon.

Senator John Cornyn blasted the Obama amnesty:

This situation is just another side effect of President Obama’s failure to deliver on his campaign promise to make immigration reform a priority in his first year. Until he does, state and local authorities are left with no choice but to pick up the slack for prosecuting and detaining criminal aliens.

Read More →

The debate over illegal immigration often is clouded with the question of whether illegal immigrants are a net economic benefit or cost to society. This is often amplified by the leftist when he says “these people do the jobs Americans won’t do,” which has often struck me as rather demeaning of both the immigrant and the American – not to mention being ridiculous.

As someone who lives in Texas and has dealt with the illegal population first hand – in both a personal and professional capacity – my belief is that it is critically important we remember that these are human beings, each with his own story, the vast majority of whom are good people looking for a better way of life in America.

But it is neither good for America nor good for immigrants, legal or illegal, for our country to abandon the rule of law and to continue to absorb the cost of illegal immigration. Now, of course, it is a difficult calculation – having to take into account various taxes paid vs. all services consumed, and basing that on an unknown number of people here illegally. But the good folks at FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) have issued a report estimating that the net cost of illegal immigration to the American taxpayer is approximately $100 billion.

Read More →

The debate over illegal immigration often is clouded with the question of whether illegal immigrants are a net economic benefit or cost to society. This is often amplified by the leftist when he says “these people do the jobs Americans won’t do,” which has often struck me as rather demeaning of both the immigrant and the American – not to mention being ridiculous.

As someone who lives in Texas and has dealt with the illegal population first hand – in both a personal and professional capacity – my belief is that it is critically important we remember that these are human beings, each with his own story, the vast majority of whom are good people looking for a better way of life in America.

But it is neither good for America nor good for immigrants, legal or illegal, for our country to abandon the rule of law and to continue to absorb the cost of illegal immigration. Now, of course, it is a difficult calculation – having to take into account various taxes paid vs. all services consumed, and basing that on an unknown number of people here illegally. But the good folks at FAIR (Federation for American Immigration Reform) have issued a report estimating that the net cost of illegal immigration to the American taxpayer is approximately $100 billion.

Read More →