US News
Judge blocks key part of Bush immigration crackdown
Oct 10, 2007, 23:00 GMT
San Francisco - A federal judge in San Francisco on Wednesday issued an injunction barring the Bush administration from threatening to prosecute businesses if they fail to fire workers whose Social Security numbers don't match government records.
The so-called no-match rule had been a cornerstone of the government's plans to crack down on illegal immigration. But US District Judge Charles Breyer blocked the move, saying that if implemented, 'it would result in irreparable harm to innocent workers and employers.'
The administration had planned to send letters to 140,000 employers whose payroll included at least 10 workers whose Social Security numbers did not match the government's database.
The letters would give the employer 90 days to resolve the discrepancy and an additional three days for an employee to submit a new, valid number. After that, an employer who failed to fire the worker would be subject to civil fines or criminal prosecution under a 1986 law that prohibits businesses from knowingly employing illegal immigrants.
The proposal was contested in the courts by labour unions, who said the no-match rule would lead to widespread firings of legal employees who were the victims of commonly made clerical errors, or had simply changed their names due to marriage or divorce.
Many workers would be unable to locate records within sprawling federal agencies and clear up discrepancies within 90 days, the unions said.
On Wednesday the judge agreed. 'There is a strong likelihood that employers may simply fire employees who are unable to resolve the discrepancy within 90 days, even if the employees are actually authorized to work,' Breyer said.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, whose agency issued the rule, said the government would consider its options, including an appeal to the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
Relying on 'accurate' government records is a foolish concept, particularly Social Security. Women may have worked under both maiden and married names, and there are known problems with accuracy, which is why those facing retirement are asked to review their salary history. ID's can be faked, and existing numbers can be usurped by other people, and a dupe card obtained.
What we need is a valid 'Real ID' or similar concept, where a standard method of ID is used nationwide. The old 'privacy' fears of a national ID are overwhelmed by the risks of not having a system.
We have a court system where guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Anyone judged on status based on Social Security records, subject to deportation, deserves the same courtesy.
Bush has put himself into a political box by pandering to Mexicans, who seem to think that the U.S. is an extension of Mexico. This is catering to hispanics who are here legally, who want their families to receive the same privilege - and many hispanic families are very 'extended'. At the same time, his Conservative wing on the hard right is looking for him to take action against those here illegally. That should start with protecting our borders, to keep more from entering.
At this point, we're focused on evicting people from a place without locks on the door.
Yet another example of why rulings of judges in the ninth circuit are far and away the most overturned. They simply ignore the law. that whole circuit needs a serious cleaning out
...the government cannot enforce the law?
The original source of the out of control illegal immigration situation is a failure of the government to do it's job and secure the borders.
Their efforts now, to make employers become immigration law enforcers, is passing the buck.
Clearly, the government failed to do it's job, now it wants to make employers do it's job for them.
The 9th Circuit is a necessary balance, as the Supreme Court tilts more and more rightward. How can a 'strict constructionist' rule on what the Constitution had to say about issues that did not even EXIST when the framers wrote the document? Why did the Constitution require the Bill of Rights (first 10 Amendments) a few years after it was written? How can a document that's been amended 27 times, including banning slavery, and giving women the right to vote, be seen as 'static'? There's not a word in there about automobiles, movies, TV, or the internet. The framers provided a mechanism for change through Amendments, and made it a difficult process.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution
'The authors of the Constitution were clearly aware that changes would be necessary from time to time if the Constitution was to endure and cope with the effects of the anticipated growth of the nation. However, they were also conscious that such change should not be easy, lest it permit ill-conceived and hastily passed amendments. Balancing this, they also wanted to ensure that an overly rigid requirement of unanimity would not block action desired by the vast majority of the population. Their solution was to devise a dual process by which the Constitution could be altered.
Unlike most constitutions, amendments to the U.S. constitution are appended to the existing body of the text, rather than being revisions of or insertions into the main articles. There is no provision for expunging from the text obsolete or rescinded provisions.'
==============
The latest dustup is about McCain's error (deliberate) in determining that the Constitution describes the U.S. as a 'Christian Nation', when no such reference exists. The framers were religious (Deists), and deliberately created a secular document insofar as favoring one religion above others.
page: 1
Way toOct 10th, 2007 - 23:59:34
go judge. I really didn't think there was anybody on this planet dumber than George Bush. You made the grade.
Report this comment