Pulitzer Prize winner: illegal immigrant

[Ranb]

Quote the part where I said that. I think you've likely failed to understand my arguments. Here is post #40 where I acknowledge that Vargas was in violation of the law:

That would be post #38 where you said;

Yes, the terrible crime of getting an education and obtaining employment.

You were in denial like so may people I hear on TV getting all weepy about the "law abiding" illegal aliens that commit fraud to enter or stay in the country.

This is just a madening phrase. This notion of deportation without breaking a law seems to be purely a figment of your imagination. What the hell are you talking about?

I was talking about how he claims to continue to work using an altered SSN card. That is illegal, right?


Ranb

 

[TraneWreck]

That would be post #38 where you said;

Haha, what ground-breaking knowledge was dropped in post 39 that made me go from thinking he hadn't broken a law to acknowledging that he had? Because in post 40 I clearly state that he was in violation of the law.

You completely failed to understand the point of the admittedly brief post 38, and this entire time, no matter how clearly I explain my position, you're still confused. Once again, all of the illegalities that occurred were meant to support a larger purpose. Was it to steal people's identities? Commit credit card fraud? Set up an international underaged sex ring?

No, it was to get an education and find a job. This was the evil master plan. The breach was the means of obtaining an end. The end actually benefited the nation, so there was no serious crime committed. You're basically arguing that we shouldn't distinguish a person who forges a check to pay a hitman to kill her husband from a person who forges a check to buy groceries for her kids.

Just amazing.

You were in denial like so may people I hear on TV getting all weepy about the "law abiding" illegal aliens that commit fraud to enter or stay in the country.

Oh god. Read just two posts down where I explain my position. The confusion is yours, entirely.

I was talking about how he claims to continue to work using an altered SSN card. That is illegal, right?

Read this sentence of yours again:

No one would be suggesting that he be deported if he did not break the law.

What the **** is that supposed to mean? It makes no sense. Has anyone accused you of advocating deportation even if Vargas didn't break the law? What point were trying to make with that? It's an amusingly pointless statement in an already vapid paragraph. It may be your finest work.

 

[TraneWreck]

I disagree. I think it makes perfectly good sense to spend limited enforcement resources disproportionately more on removing violent criminal illegal aliens than either non-violent criminal illegal aliens or non criminal illegal aliens.

I agree with that prioritization. That's pretty much how it works now, anyway:

"I don’t think he'll be detained, and he's unlikely to be deported," concludes David Leopold, a Cleveland-based immigration attorney and president of the American Immigration Law Institute. "Under immigration law, he could be exposed to deportation and detention," Leopold notes. But in the past, federal authorities—facing limited resources—have used prosecutorial discretion, and the Obama administration has repeatedly emphasized that it prioritizes deporting those convicted of violent crimes.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/06/will-feds-deport-jose-antonio-vargas

As a matter of practicality, I'm fine with that level of discretion.

If, however, Vargas gets to stay for fear of generating controversy while America continues the practice of deporting people born in other countries who came here illegally when they were very young, that would be wrong. Passing on Vargas to continue doing the same thing to lots of lower-profile people is hypocritical. Either apply the standards to everyone, or no one, there should not be class exceptions.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I agree with that prioritization. That's pretty much how it works now, anyway:

Which is what I've been saying.

And if you generalize this principle of focused enforcement to the broader idea that law enforcement and prosecutors can exercise discretion, then it's also pretty much how it works in ALL areas of criminal law at all levels of government, not just immigration.

ETA: Also, at the federal level anyway, this power of the executive branch to choose which cases to prosecute is another check/balance on legislative authority. On the other side, Congress can also said to be partially responsible for this in not appropriating limitless funding for enforcement of immigration laws.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Beady, RandB, et al,

If tomorrow you found out that your parents brought you here from country X when you were a month old but never filled out the paperwork to make you legal, would you have no objection to leaving your job, your house, your friends, and your family, everything you are familiar with, in order to return to country X (where you may not even speak the language) until everything is sorted out?

If you could make it even one day past your 18th birthday without knowing that you mean?

 

[pipelineaudio]

Or reject the claim as unsubstantiated. It's really not very credible that hotel management positions (except for the highest levels) are "almost exclusively" filled by illegal aliens. Barring any evidence, I reject the claim.

I thought that I couldn't provide any evidence but I was wrong, sort of...its not too concrete, but the opposition put up by the hotel and lodging associations, among others should at least merit a look

You could possibly argue that the opposition by the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association could possibly think they would lose tourist dollars over sb1070, but the California Hotel and Lodging Association? Why were they so violently opposed? They stood to make money over this in the case of AZ losing tourists

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I thought that I couldn't provide any evidence but I was wrong, sort of...its not too concrete, but the opposition put up by the hotel and lodging associations, among others should at least merit a look

You could possibly argue that the opposition by the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association could possibly think they would lose tourist dollars over sb1070, but the California Hotel and Lodging Association? Why were they so violently opposed? They stood to make money over this in the case of AZ losing tourists

None of this supports your claim that management positions (other than at the highest levels) in the hotel industry are "almost exclusively" held by illegals.

That the controversial (and unconstitutional) parts of SB1070 would have been bad for tourism is another issue entirely, but it points out that the federal immigration enforcement policy balances a number of concerns. International relations and the effect of even perceived anti-Mexican (or xenophobic in general) legislation and their effects on tourism is one of them.

Again, though, since there is no evidence to support your claim that most management positions in the hotel industry are held by illegals, I reject it as incredible.

 

[Ranb]

Time to bring this debate up to date possibly?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/15/justice/texas-jose-vargas-detained/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and undocumented immigrant Jose Antonio Vargas suspected he wouldn't get out.

His fear came to fruition Tuesday morning when he was detained at a Texas airport while trying to pass through security en route to Los Angeles, said Ryan Eller, campaign director for Define American, a group Vargas founded in 2011.

Vargas was being questioned at a U.S Customs and Border Protection facility at the airport in McAllen, Eller said at a news conference.

Ranb

 

[xjx388]

Of what relevance is his Pulitzer Prize? He is not here legally so it seems pretty straightforward to me that he should be deported.

 

[Ranb]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/15/justice/texas-jose-vargas-detained/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

He was released on his own recognizance with a notice to appear before an immigration judge, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement.

What normally happens to people who appear before an immigration judge after they enter illegally? I would presume that he is not one of those who would be subject to expedited removal.

Ranb