ACLU vs. Hazleton ordinance - Merged Threads

L

Lambo

Moderator
Hazelton's Anti Illegal Invader Ordinance WILL BE ENFORCED!

http://today.reuters.com/news/artic..._0_US-USA-IMMIGRATION-TOWN.xml&archived=False

HAZLETON, Pennsylvania (Reuters) - Officials in the Pennsylvania town of Hazleton on Friday strengthened a local law designed to drive illegal immigrants away in a bid to defend the measure against legal challenges.

Hazleton City Council passed a new version of the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, an ordinance first passed in July that was already one of the toughest anti-illegal immigrant laws in the country. It has since been copied by other cities where illegal immigration is blamed for rising crime and overburdened social services.

The new law, approved by a vote of 4-1, increases pressure on local employers to avoid hiring illegal immigrants and raises fines for landlords who rent rooms to them.


Legal employees can now sue their employers for any work lost as a result of a business license being revoked because a company was found to have hired illegal immigrants.

The new law would also revoke a business license within three days of a violation being discovered. The previous statute would only have canceled a license at the time of renewal. Landlords will have to pay $250 a day for every illegal alien they are accommodating.

"This law is tougher in many ways," said Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta who led the campaign for the ordinance. He says the quality of life in the town of 31,000 has fallen because of an influx of illegal immigrants, mostly from Central America.

The new law is designed mainly to withstand legal challenges that Barletta said could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court
 
easy to notice that opponets of such law enforcement use carefully crafted lies to state their case...the only true fear the opponets have is that illegal aliens who should be deported WILL be deported if caught...liars defending liars with lies....LIES & LIES....& yet more LIES....never trust a cause or the defenders of such who seem to only defend their position with LIES......keep right on lying, HELL, as big & crowded as it is, always has room for more to enter...:eek:
 
Farmers Branch, Texas is looking to do the same thing. LULAC is against it, so that ought to tell you right there it’s a good idea.
 
I'd like to see that adopted into law by the United States nationwide!! Time to stop all this silliness with illegals. Where's our pride and power?
 
A "Mexican national" (the media's word,not mine) was pulled over near houston this morning, he was found to be carrying over 1700 POUNDS of marijuana, over a Million dollars worth.

And of course the vehicle he was driving was stolen.

Something has got to be done, the crimes they commit is reason enough to end this invasion, much less the drain on our social services.
 
Yikes! Does Hazelton have any resteraunts or factories? If they do, this is going to get ugly... and expensive, too.
Click to expand...

Got to ask, expensive for who, taxpayer, workers, or the wealthy.?
 
That's wonderful news!
This law, along with the 700 mile fence Congress approved and various other actions taken by towns/cities across the country, tell me the pendulum is swinging in the other direction.....FINALLY!
Americans are FED UP with this illegal crap!:mad:
It's absolutely AMAZING that there is even a QUESTION as to whether or not to fight illegal immigration!!
As one radio host so aptly puts it..."Liberalism is a mental disorder"!:cool:
Bravo for Hazelton!!!!!!!:D :D
 
I just fired off an e-mail to the Mayor thanking him on his cities firm stance on the problem.
I also read the ordinance.(Hazleton home page)
I'd be interested in hearing what ordinance points ACLU members find unacceptable.
And please state whether or not you actually are an ACLU member, or supporter.
Unless, of course, you're uncomfortable doing so.
 
Point #1: The ordnance's existence.
The city doesn't have the authority to address this issue.

Point #2: The ordnance makes no provisions for educating landlords and business owners so that they can tell the difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal immigrant.

Point #3: "Knowingly or unknowingly" makes every landlord and business owner a potential criminal, and the only way to protect themselves is to not hire/ house/ feed anybody who looks foreign.

The way I read the Constitution (and I'm sure this will spark a lively debate) The Constitution does not address the act of illegally crossing our borders. That would fall to the Federal government under Title 8 Ch 12.
If you wish to punish somebody for aiding and abetting, *that's* where you do it.

Once a person crosses our border (legally or otherwise) he/she becomes entitled to certain protections under the Constitution including equal treatment under the law. Note that it says all "persons", not all "citizens".
Finally, the ordnance violates the due process clause for landlords/business owners/vendors because it's virtually impossible to distinguish legals from illegals.

I want us to get a handle on this, but it needs to be done legally. Seems the Justice agrees with me.
 
Hopefully more communities will do what they see as correct, regardless of the whining of the ACLU, the courts and those who think that just because some illegal criminal invaders made it across the border they are magically entitled to protection under OUR Constitution.
 
I'm not a "Constitutional expert" so excuse me if I don't understand some of the legal aspects of this.
Point #1: The ordnance's existence.
The city doesn't have the authority to address this issue.
Click to expand...
Are you telling me that the Constitution doesn't allow states/cities/municipalities/whatever, to protect themselves against large numbers of people that are breaking our laws?
Point #2: The ordnance makes no provisions for educating landlords and business owners so that they can tell the difference between a legal immigrant and an illegal immigrant.
Click to expand...
There already is a national citizenship verification system in place for emplyers, is there not?
I forget what it's called, but wouldn't/couldn't they (landlords)use the very same system now in place for employers to verify citizenship?
And is the idea that "ignorance of the law is no justification for breaking it" no longer valid?
#3: "Knowingly or unknowingly" makes every landlord and business owner a potential criminal, and the only way to protect themselves is to not hire/ house/ feed anybody who looks foreign.
Click to expand...
I'm sure a few illegals are always going to slip through the cracks, but if every landlord/employer shows a good faith attempt to verify citizenship by using all the tools now available, I doubt much harm would come to them.
And does anyone doubt this will make them far more vigilant?
Finally, the ordnance violates the due process clause for landlords/business owners/vendors
Click to expand...
How is that?
There has to be some form of proceeding to address real or perceived violations.
it's virtually impossible to distinguish legals from illegals.
Click to expand...
Isn't that what passports/birth certificates/SS numbers etc are for?
I want us to get a handle on this, but it needs to be done legally.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced these actions ARE illegal.
You mean all of the individuals who worked to put this together have no idea what they are doing legally?
This would appear to me to be, according to your analysis, just an attempt to put yet another impediment in the road to fixing this problem.
Keep the issue mired in the courts for however long, all the while letting more and more illegals cross over in to the USA.
Unless I'm mistaken, aren't you guys ALSO against any sort of fence on the lower border?
How is it illegal to put a fence on your own property?
I want us to get a handle on this
Click to expand...
Where the ACLU is concerned, I really don't see it!:confused:
"Seems the Justice agrees with me."
What Justice?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top