More Protests Planned Against 'Secure...

More Protests Planned Against 'Secure Communities'

There are 5 comments on the www.wnyc.org story from Oct 25, 2010, titled More Protests Planned Against 'Secure Communities'. In it, www.wnyc.org reports that:

Immigration advocates and local elected officials are keeping the pressure on Governor Paterson to withdraw New York from participating in 'Secure Communities,' a national program that would allow police to share fingerprint information with federal authorities.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.wnyc.org.

Speeders Kill Kids

United States

#1 Oct 25, 2010
<<< 'Secure Communities,' a national program that would allow police to share fingerprint information with federal authorities.>>>>

WTF???!!! How can anyone oppose that?
GOOD ONE

Los Angeles, CA

#2 Oct 25, 2010
Liberal Democrats like me even support this!

Since: Sep 09

Location hidden

#3 Oct 26, 2010
Speeders Kill Kids wrote:
<<< 'Secure Communities,' a national program that would allow police to share fingerprint information with federal authorities.>>>>
WTF???!!! How can anyone oppose that?
You are SOOOO dense! Don't you know fingerprinting is RAAAAAAAACIST?!

“A Nation of Legal Immigrants”

Since: Nov 07

Lake City Florida,/ Nebraska

#4 Oct 26, 2010
Speeders Kill Kids wrote:
<<< 'Secure Communities,' a national program that would allow police to share fingerprint information with federal authorities.>>>>
WTF???!!! How can anyone oppose that?
The Bail Reform Act of 1984 created a powerful detention provision that authorizes a state of local police officer to arrest any alien other than a legal permanent resident for a federal “offense,” and to request a local magistrate to temporarily detain the alien for up to ten days without bail while awaiting transfer into federal custody, so long as the alien is found to be a “flight risk” or danger to any other person or the community.”

The authority to make arrest for federal offenses under 18 U.S.C. 3041 extends to state and local law enforcement officers.(U.S. v Bowdach, 561 F.2d 1160, 1168 (5th Cir. 1977) An illegal alien is an inherent flight risk.

Supreme Court Ruling Razes Artificial Fire Wall Between Local Law Enforcement and Immigration Enforcement (Muehler v. Mena) 9-0 Landmark Decision (Washington D.C.—April 1, 2005) In its March 22 ruling in the case of Muehler v. Mena, the Supreme Court removed barriers that prevent local law enforcement officers from questioning the immigration status of individuals they suspect to be in the United States illegally. In this groundbreaking decision, the high Court rejected the claim of Ira Mena, a permanent resident of the U.S., that police had violated the Fourth Amendment while conducting a lawful search of her home.

The Fourth Amendment provides protection by establishing that persons be shielded against unreasonable search and seizure. Mena argued that by questioning her, and the illegal alien detainees about their immigration status during a lawful search, officers violated her Fourth Amendment rights. Mena further claimed that questions asked about her citizenship required officers to have had independent reasonable suspicion regarding the unlawfulness of her immigration status.

Calling a decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals “faulty,” the Supreme Court held that “mere police questioning [regarding one’s immigration status] does not constitute a seizure.” The Court continued its landmark ruling on this issue by stating that “the officers did not need reasonable suspicion to ask Mena for her name, date of birth, or immigration status.”

“Whatever legal fig leaf many police departments have been using to justify policies of non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities, has been stripped away by this landmark Supreme Court decision,”

“If local police are barred from cooperating with federal authorities in the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws it is purely a political decision on the part of local politicians and police chiefs. There is no legal barrier to local police inquiring about a person’s immigration status and then acting upon the information they gather.”

1918
Arrest of Illegal Aliens by State and Local Officers

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_readin...
Speeders Kill Kids

United States

#5 Oct 26, 2010
Cricket 23 wrote:
,” the Supreme Court held that “mere police questioning [regarding one’s immigration status] does not constitute a seizure.”
Yeah - everybody would agree with that.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

David Paterson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A.M. Roundup: Goodbye rain, hello Havana Apr '15 Don from Canada 1
News How Sharpton gets paid to not cry 'racism' at c... (Jan '15) Jan '15 reality is a crutch 7
News Governor vows to collect cigarette taxes (Aug '10) Nov '14 Carbon Junkie 152
News Paterson: Duffy Would Make a Superb Governor (Jul '10) Aug '14 Diamond Daisy 3
News Thrust into state's top job, David Paterson exi... (Dec '10) Aug '14 Diamond Daisy 5
News Fred Armisen Keeps it Weird (Feb '14) Feb '14 Rahul 1
News Britney Spears shows off her newly fiery locks ... (Feb '14) Feb '14 Big mike 1
More from around the web