From “The Good Illegal Immigrant” Files: If You Want To Enforce Our Laws Against Illegals, Apparently You Deserve To Die, And Democrats Will “Get You”

Texas state Rep. Philip Cortez (D) told the Washington Post,  “We were just on the floor talking about the SB4 protests, and [state Rep.] Matt Rinaldi came up to us and made it a point to say, ‘I called (ICE) on all of them. And this is completely unacceptable. We will not be intimidated. We will not be disrespected.”

Who is “we”? It Cortez an illegal immigrant? I hope not, because that would be illegal and a violation of the Texas Constitution. Why would he be intimidated and disrespected by an elected lawmaker reporting law breakers to appropriate authorities? It is clear that he wasn’t  intimidated or disrespected. What kind of elected official feels disrespected when he is told, “I just reported those people who are holding signs that say, ‘I broke the law, and I’m proud of it, nyah nyah nyah!.“?   This is just the unconscionable rhetorical slight of hand being habitually used by open-border advocates and unprincipled Mexican-American lawmakers to pander to their constituency.

It is not “completely unacceptable” to report illegal immigrants to ICE. It is completely unacceptable for an elected official to make the nonsensical, rule-of-law rejecting statement that doing so is unacceptable.

The protesters in question were  chanting and waving signs against Senate Bill 4, the controversial Texas legislation that Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed into law this month that bans sanctuary cities, allows police to question anyone they detain about their immigration status, and compels local officials to comply with federal requests to detain individuals in state and local law enforcement facilities.  Ethics Alarms has discussed the deportation of illegals who trumpet their illegal status in public. Doing so is openly defying the law, undermines lawful conduct, and essentially dares law enforcement to do its job. This is breaking the law in front of officials as if there is nothing that can be done about it, just like speeding past a police car on the highway.

Elected officials swear to uphold the law. Rinaldi did the right thing, and the Democrats that confronted him are irredeemably wrong, even without considering their threats. Democratic Rep. Justin Rodriguez said that  Rinaldi was threatening as well, and saying he was prepared”to put a bullet in one of my colleagues’ heads.”  (In the tweet above, Rinaldi claims that was in response to the threat to “get” him.) Even assuming Rodriguez’s version is accurate, the issue isn’t incivility. The issue is whether it is “unacceptable” to report people to ICE who are saying, “Look at me! I’m here illegally, and you can’t touch me!” in public.

Contrary to the increasingly bizarre civic stance of Democrats, enforcing the law is never “unacceptable.”

Another one of Cortez’s colleagues,  the alleged assaulter Rep. Ramon Romero Jr., made this unacceptable and unethical statement:

“[ Rinaldi] saw the crowd, and he saw illegals. He saw people that, whether he likes to accept it or not, in his heart, he has hate for those people, and he wants to see them gone. He wants to see them gone so much, to the point that he called ICE.”

This is the Left’s baseline justification for illegal immigration now: pure emotion and race-baiting. It’s all personal and based on bigotry; that’s the lie. The argument that it is wrong to enforce laws is untenable on its face, so the current tactic is to claim it’s wrong because of the motives behind enforcement. It must be prejudice, it must be hate. He wants to see them gone so much, to the point that he called ICE” is an astoundingly unethical statement, as it suggests that alerting authorities to flagrant illegal conduct is an extreme act that must be the product of malign motives.

I don’t hate illegal immigrants at all, though I intensely object to the intellectually dishonest and civically irresponsible arguments for ignoring their defiance of our laws. I sympathize with the plight of illegal immigrants, but it is not my job nor America’s to solve their problems after they have broken our laws. Like Rinaldi, I do want illegal immigrants who arrogantly flout the law and then flaunt their violations gone. They deserve to be deported.

Whatever a “good illegal immigrant” may be, if there is such a person, an illegal who publicly advertises his disrespect of our laws as a badge of honor doesn’t qualify.

54 Comments

Filed under Ethics Alarms Award Nominee, Ethics Train Wrecks, Government & Politics, Incompetent Elected Officials, Law & Law Enforcement, Leadership, Rights, This Helps Explain Why Trump Is President

54 responses to “From “The Good Illegal Immigrant” Files: If You Want To Enforce Our Laws Against Illegals, Apparently You Deserve To Die, And Democrats Will “Get You”

  1. Son of Maimonides

    “We were just on the floor talking about the SB4 protests, and [state Rep.] Matt Rinaldi came up to us and made it a point to say, ‘I called (ICE) on all of them. And this is completely unacceptable. We will not be intimidated. We will not be disrespected.”

    There appears to be missing punctuation which would indicate where the quote within a quote ends. As currently read, it would seem that Mr. Rinaldi was the one nothing that it is unacceptable for the illegals to be there and that he (Rinaldi) would not be intimidated.

    Ah, yes, and Google confirms the quoted quote ends with “them.”

    Well-written article. Thank you for your insight!

  2. Spartan

    It comes off as mean-spirited, don’t you think? Does this same politician call the police every time he sees someone speeding, jaywalking, etc.? Does he call the police if his children or the neighbor’s children drink underage? How about marijuana use?

    If I witnessed a violent crime, I would absolutely call the police. But would I report an illegal for the sole reason of being illegal? No. There would have to be an additional crime involved.

    • How about the additional conduct of proclaiming that you are illegal in public? That’s the issue here. Would I call ICE on a neighbor who let it slip that he was here illegally? I’m not sure—probably not, but it would be an ethics conflict.. If he flew a falg outside his home saying “Illegal and proud of it”?

      I’d call ICE, and I don’t think that is mean at all.

      You really compare sneaking across the border to jaywalking? That’s a problem right there: you’ve been brainwashed,

      • Spartan

        I’m not comparing anything. I am saying that there are categories of crimes in my mind — violent and non-violent. Some non-violent crimes are, quite frankly, none of my business.

        I know an illegal family in our community. And it hasn’t even entered my mind to call ICE (although I know who to call — I have a dear friend who does deportations there).

        Remember my zombie hypothetical from a few blogs past? There are very good humanitarian reasons to flee to another country. And the U.S. does not recognize some of them (gang violence being a big one), so I do empathize with many families’ decisions to come here illegally. I would do the same if my son’s choice was to join a gang or die. Additionally, I would be proud of my decision to risk unknown circumstances in another country if it meant that my child would live.

        • Steve-O-in-NJ

          And I’m not only the illegal alien hair club president, but I’m also a client. Well, I suppose I should be going…

          Hey you! (chased off stage by two guys with INS on the back of the jacket)

          -From the short-lived “House of Buggin'”

        • ANY OTHER COUNTRY in this hemisphere would be all over illegal Americans within their borders like white on rice. Rank hypocrisy from the left and from these countries.

          Used to be “any country in the world” until Europe lost their marbles.

        • Spartan wrote, “I know an illegal family in our community. And it hasn’t even entered my mind to call ICE”

          You are literally part of the illegal immigration problem and not part of the solution.

          “There are very good humanitarian reasons to flee to another country. And the U.S. does not recognize some of them (gang violence being a big one), so I do empathize with many families’ decisions to come here illegally. I would do the same if my son’s choice was to join a gang or die. Additionally, I would be proud of my decision to risk unknown circumstances in another country if it meant that my child would live.”

          Let me see if I understand your position; it’s fine for those living in gang infested neighborhoods in a foreign country to illegally cross our borders and live here illegally when they could have chosen to move to a different part of their own city/region/country that’s not infested with gangs?

          Your attempt to justify the ILLEGAL actions of illegal immigrants to break our laws is simply not acceptable or even reasonable when these people have other options within their own countries. Deny that and you’re denying reality.

            • So what Spartan?

              People in El Salvador literally have to cross multiple international borders to get to the United States by land, they could have stopped in Guatemala or Mexico; I know people living in both of those countries and there are very nice and reasonable places to live that are free from that kind of violence. There are other good options south of El Salvador too! Using that as an excuse to come all the way to the United States is just bull shit.

              • Spartan

                Just so we’re clear — You are acknowledging that they have a right to flee, you just don’t want them here?

                • Spartan wrote, “Just so we’re clear — You are acknowledging that they have a right to flee, you just don’t want them here?”

                  No Spartan, you’re not going to get away with at bull shit!

                  They have the right to flee their location to be safe but that does not give them the right or justify them crossing our borders illegally and remain in our country illegally, PERIOD!

                  If you don’t like that Spartan, I really don’t give a damn! You and your pack of illogical political hacks seem to think that everyone’s entitled to the USA and seem to think that the USA should be everyone’s first and only choice for options to change their lives. You are wrong and you try to rationalize away anything that contradicts your faulty opinion.

                  • Spartan

                    That doesn’t make sense. They have the right to flee to be safe, but to where exactly?

                    Also, many of them come here because they already have family here legally. It’s easier to go somewhere where you have a connection.

                    I never said that everyone is entitled to the USA, but I do believe that there is a humanitarian crisis that needs to be dealt with appropriately.

                    • Spartan,
                      You’re a never ending stream of rationalizations and excuses.

                      Your arguments about this are a failure in logic and reason.

                    • Steve-O-in-NJ

                      The US isn’t the world’s orphanage, hospital, and place of refuge for everyone unhappy with the way things are in their native country. Europe isn’t the world’s orphanage, hospital, and place of refuge for everyone unhappy with the way things are wherever. That goes double when that wherever is a place where the two sides in a civil war are a choice between Ba’athism and bin Ladenism. The US has always worked by the rule that no American citizen is supposed to be treated differently because of race, religion, ethnicity, or national origin, however, that does not mean that the US cannot treat anyone who is NOT a citizen differently that it might treat a citizen. In any case, the left now says it is time that we revisit the question of weapons ownership since technology has changed. If we are to revisit that question, why can’t we also revisit this question and say that now the situation has changed? In the past we had single-shot muskets, but we also didn’t have huge numbers of individuals coming from places where the prevailing ideology was anti-US and the philosophy of life is fundamentally incompatible with the west who then failed to assimilate.

                    • Spartan

                      Steve-O is right. It’s technically nobody’s problem — but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do something about it.

                    • Spartan wrote, “Steve-O is right. It’s technically nobody’s problem — but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do something about it.”

                      Doesn’t that kind of thinking lead directly to rationalizing based on the following:

                      13. The Saint’s Excuse: “It’s for a good cause”
                      25A. Frederick’s Compulsion or “It’s My Duty!”
                      28. The Revolutionary’s Excuse: “These are not ordinary times.”

                    • Isn’t that crisis “Some countries manage their human resources better than others, making those countries that do more attractive to those citizens in the countries that don’t”? Isn’t the solution for those countries mismanagi8ng their human resources to do better?

                    • Steve-O-in-NJ

                      A lot of the world’s nations need to do a lot of things a lot better. The Central and South American nations need to get over their love affair with caudillos and the Islamic world needs to get over a theocratic mindset that makes the rest of the world the enemy. A book on the history of the Americas south of the border would tell the story of one charismatic tyrant after another grappling with other charismatic tyrants to dominate the region like colossi, and wherever the colossi stepped during the grapple their feet would crush ordinary people. On the one hand one can’t blame ordinary people for wanting to get out of that, but on the other hand, one CAN often blame the ordinary people for putting those charismatic tyrants in power in the first place, and rightly ask why a nation that usually doesn’t put charismatic tyrants in power in the first place must bear the burden of their errors.

                      Turkey and the Levant (for a while, and not lately) were proof that it was possible to have working secular democracy in the Islamic world, albeit sometimes a very fragile democracy and sometimes one that cost both treasure and blood. Saudi Arabia and the oil rich Gulf states are proof that it’s possible to do well in the Islamic world, albeit sometimes under a less than free government. However, the Islamic world can’t avoid the fact that its foundation, the Koran, has at its root the principle that differing ideas are not allowed, and that it is all right, even encouraged, to use violence against those with different ideas, and that it is all right for those adhering to the right ideas according to it to use force to keep everyone else in line. That’s why Israel has to be constantly on guard. That’s why Lebanon was under the boot of Syria for decades. That’s why Ghadaffi scoffed at the possibility of elections and there was no one to take his place when he was ousted. That’s why Syria is now a no-man’s land. That’s why Pakistani prime ministers and candidates regularly get assassinated.That’s why a nuclear-armed Iran would be a greater danger than the USSR. That’s why if ever the House of Saud can’t hold it together, the world’s in big trouble. On the one hand you can’t blame ordinary people for wanting to get out of this potential volcano, but on the other hand, you can blame them for not trying to change this culture, then fleeing to another place and attempting to impose that very culture once they get there.

                  • Son of Maimonides

                    Zoltar Speaks!:

                    How unpleasant. “Illogical political hacks” is just a silly thing to say.

                    • Son of Maimonides wrote, “How unpleasant. “Illogical political hacks” is just a silly thing to say.”

                      I don’t care if it’s unpleasant to people.

                      Condoning something that is clearly illegal is illogical, and turning a problem that is clearly a legal issue into a political firestorm is what political hacks do to justify their illogical motives; thus it’s not silly to say it’s actually correct to use the phrase illogical political hacks when describing those from the political left that are literally rationalizing, condoning, and politicizing blatant illegal activity in every level of political activity from school boards to municipal politics to local politics to state politics right up to the federal government politics.

                      Whether you like ti or not and whether it’s politically correct or not, illogical political hacks is the correct phrase to use.

                    • Son of Maimonides

                      Zoltar:

                      I never said anything regarding political correctness, as I don’t generally accept the concept. Your style of writing is simply unpleasant, like Spongebob Squarepants, Geico commercials, and Olive Garden.

                      That said, my ten year-old heard me repeat it aloud in astonishment and has now since it “excellent.” Then again, he also said the same thing the first time we got him a fidget spinner, and he’s already gone through a dozen.

                    • Son of Maimonides wrote, “Your style of writing is simply unpleasant”

                      Well okay then.

                      Do you have any expectations of me now that you’ve shared that with me?

            • If someone is concerned about gang violence, which is a breakdown of civil society, in another country, the appropriate answer is not to break down civil society in his or her own country. If there is a firm belief that action is needed, then the ethical thing to do is to take action in that other country, as an individual helping the people in that country reestablish order. If in studying the situation, that sort of individual action seems implausible, then a person has to consider whether they really do care about the situation, or whether they are just making a display of caring.

            • Greg

              The article that you cite mentions in passing that, as a result of illegal immigration, there are Salvadoran gangs operating in 46 US states. They’re just as murderous here as there. They are a major and growing law enforcement problem. How is that an argument in favor of allowing more Salvadoran immigration?

        • “I am saying that there are categories of crimes in my mind — violent and non-violent. Some non-violent crimes are, quite frankly, none of my business.”

          Would you, for instance, call police if you saw a robbery in progress? Maybe that’s a bad example, there’s a threat of violence there… How about someone breaking and entering? Or just stealing. What if you knew of a person that was cashing their dead mother’s social security cheques?

          • Spartan

            What if you know someone who cheats on his/her taxes? For e.g., does not report casino winnings after a weekend in Vegas?

            • It’s a foreign example to me, as gambling winnings aren’t taxed in Canada, and a bad personal example, because if I were to become aware of someone cheating on their taxes, I would be risking my designation if I didn’t report it and the CRA ever found out.

              But I think that’s a great example in general… The average person would have absolutely no way to know that a person was cheating on their taxes unless they were to brag about it. Quite frankly, if someone brags about breaking the law, they’re courting punishment… In much the same was as the illegal immigrant who shows up at congress. I wonder… How do you know your neighbor is illegal? Regardless… It’s perhaps easier to do nothing, and it might even feel good, but it’s still not the right thing to do.

              • Spartan

                I think most Americans wouldn’t turn family or friends in for cheating on their taxes and it most definitely is the type of thing that a lot of Americans are proud of and brag about depending on the audience.

                I do not cheat on my taxes but I also would not report somebody who does at this level.

              • philk57

                Our Internal Revenue Service does pay a reward to people who turn in others for supposed tax cheating. The reward used to be based on a percentage of the amount recovered by the IRS. I don’t know if that program still exists in the same form; it always seemed to me to be ripe for abuse.

        • Wayne

          Unfortunately many of these “migrants” join gangs like MS-13 when they fraudulently enter the US. If the parents of these kids really cared, they would elect politicians to do something about the criminality in the failed states they live in. I too like Jack would call INS about anybody that was brazen enough to put a sign on their lawn saying “illegal alien and proud of it.”

          • Spartan

            Many of these migrants, most, all, or a few? Obviously there are gangs here, but the problem often is magnified by anti-illegal immigration types.

            I want to be in America. I want to be in America!

            • Wayne

              Fine! Do it legally though. We decide who comes in and lives and not them.

            • Greg

              Including the virulent immigrant haters in President Obama’s FBI, which said: “El Salvador has become the epicenter of gang violence in Central America and represents the largest connection to gang crime in the U.S.” https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/transnational-gangs

              And in his Treasury Department, which said:

              “MS-13 is an extremely violent and dangerous gang responsible for a multitude of crimes that directly threaten the welfare and security of U.S. citizens, as well as countries throughout Central America. . . .

              MS-13 consists of at least 30,000 members in a range of countries, including El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico, and is one of the most dangerous and rapidly expanding criminal gangs in the world today. MS-13 is active within the United States, with at least 8,000 members operating in more than 40 states and the District of Columbia. MS-13’s criminal nature can be seen in one of its mottos, “Mata, roba, viola, controla” (“Kill, steal, rape, control”). Domestically, the group is involved in multiple crimes including murder, racketeering, drug trafficking, sex trafficking and human trafficking including prostitution. The group frequently carries out violent attacks on opposing gang members, often injuring innocent bystanders. MS-13 members have been responsible for numerous killings within the United States.

              Local MS-13 cliques take direction from the group’s foreign leadership for strategic decisions involving moves into new territories and efforts to recruit new members. Money generated by local MS-13 cliques in the U.S. is consolidated and funneled to the group’s leadership in El Salvador.

              https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1733.aspx

      • Chris

        How about the additional conduct of proclaiming that you are illegal in public? That’s the issue here. Would I call ICE on a neighbor who let it slip that he was here illegally? I’m not sure—probably not, but it would be an ethics conflict.. If he flew a falg outside his home saying “Illegal and proud of it”?

        People brag about smoking weed all the time; I would regard anyone who reported them to the authorities as a mean, unethical busybody.

        I regard anyone who would call ICE against non-violent illegal immigrants in the same way.

    • “Does this same politician call the police every time he sees someone speeding, jaywalking, etc.? Does he call the police if his children or the neighbor’s children drink underage?”

      The appropriate analogy is if a group of people are speeding, and advertising it. If a group of people are jaywalking (i.e.blocking the streets), and advertising it. If a group of underage people are drinking, and advertising it. People who would not report such things are poor citizens. and liabilities to their neighbors.

      • Matthew B

        In small town America, all of those things are likely to be reported to the police. Further, the police will actually deal with such “trivial” things.

        • Spartan

          Oh good. More anecdotes passing as evidence. Here’s mine. In my small town, one of our police officers (we only had two) would ask for a blow job in exchange for not being arrested for drunk driving or underage partying.

          I don’t know what they did about jaywalking because we didn’t have crosswalks. If someone saw somebody walking anywhere, we would assume that they had been in an accident.

      • How about if fifty citizens holding up signs that they never paid their income taxes? Think the IRS would chase them down? (worked for Capone) Taxes pay for social programs and defense, whatever your preference. I originally wrote fifty people with signs about not paying income taxes, but if they’re illegal they aren’t paying their share either.

  3. Steve-O-in-NJ

    Anything the left disagrees with is hate now, and love trumps hate. Presumably the left is on the side of love, like a loving bullet in a policeman’s head from a sniper. It’s not that he hates the police so much, he loves the black community more. It’s not that the left hates the law, it’s that they love open borders more.

  4. All threats should be taken 100% literal and always taken seriously, no exceptions.

    Wanna bet that there is likely audio and video of what transpired.

    What a mess!

    • Son of Maimonides

      Zoltar:

      Well, if I’m ever forced to fire a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is you.

      Does that count?

      • Son of Maimonides

        SCOTUS says no.

      • Son of Maimonides,
        You’re talking like an idiot.

      • Son of Maimonides wrote, “if I’m ever forced to fire a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is you.”

        So did you read this “pleasant” little statement to your ten year-old too so it too can be proclaimed as being “excellent”. I’ll be curious to be around the day your ten year-old grows up and fully understands the implications of what you wrote. I’m sure you’re setting the good example and that’s the kind of thing that you’d want your child to spout off to others. I’m sure the implications of what I wrote could be wrong.

  5. And in my state… Let me start with “they are all crooks!” I have no more love for the Texas GOP than Democrats, just less disdain. The GOP here are about big business and private corporations succeeding at the expense of the citizens. The Democrats here are bat shit crazy, race baiting panderers of the worst sort (but not as bad as most other states’ Democrats… Oh dear, is that the Julie Principle?)

    But assault a state rep and he likely WILL be armed, especially the GOP (but the Democrats, in true progressive ‘do as I say, not as I do’ fashion, are almost as likely to be packing heat.) We will put State Reps in jail as quickly as anyone else (and for less than assault, too: corruption is a common offense on both sides of the aisle.)

    Hubris needs to get the traditional attention. Arrogant criminals are antithetical to America’s promises. Advertise that you are breaking the law, I will report you. It is the ethical response, else the rule of law no longer exists. Break the law in other ways, quietly? Depends on what and how would I prove it? Does no one any good to make an accusation without anything to back it up.

    Illegal immigrants steal from MY family. The absorb MY tax dollars with little in return to our state. Those services belong to American citizens, not those who come here to take what they did not earn.

    Yes, my heart bleeds for the situations in their home lands. But it is not up to us to fix the world, and the progressives get hives every time we try. You cannot have it both ways: either we ARE the worlds police (and quite bitching about military interventions) or we are NOT, and must protect our own borders lest the same corruption take over our land as well.

  6. This principle would be the same if military deserters protested against anti-desertion laws and openly proclaimed to be deserters. The only practical difference is that deserters are not yet a favored political constituency.

  7. Eternal optometrist

    The guardian headline is “Texas republican threatens to shoot democrat over immigration protest.”

  8. Sue Dunim

    Guadalupe Plascencia said she was alarmed when a San Bernardino County sheriff’s deputy asked her to sign papers related to her immigration status.

    The 59-year-old hairdresser from San Bernardino had spent the night of March 29 in jail because of a decade-old bench warrant related to her alleged failure to appear as a witness in a court case. During her night in jail, Plascencia said a deputy asked her to sign documents acknowledging that officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had inquired about her.

    “Why?” Plascencia asked. “I’m an American citizen.”

    Confused and scared, Plascencia did as she was asked, assuring herself that the entire ordeal was a mistake that would soon be cleared up….

    Being a US citizen is no more a guarantee of not being imprisoned by ICE and possibly deported, than being factually innocent is a guarantee that you won’t be convicted of a crime purely on the basis of one police officer’s testimony.

    The habit of ICE moving detainees to different detention facilities may not be intentionally designed to make access to legal advice difficult. Neither is the provision of outdated law books in the libraries, nor restriction on telecommunications. That is the effect though.

    Arcenio, who asked that his last name not be used, was picked up in February and sent to Boone County Jail in Burlington, Kentucky, said Ted Farrell, his Louisville-based lawyer. He had a prior deportation order on his record and said he was fleeing death threats from Guatemalan gang members who opposed his political views. Farrell wanted to make sure that the 41-year-old would get the right kind of interview with the asylum office and that he would have time to prepare him for it over the phone.

    But after five days in detention, Farrell said, Arcenio was sent to a facility in Brazil, Indiana. Farrell made an appointment to talk with him there, but on the day it was scheduled, he was transferred to a facility in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Farrell made a new appointment, but Arcenio was then moved to a different building in the same town. After several days of tracking, Farrell said, he finally got in touch.

    Even then, Arcenio’s request for an interview was denied. ICE scheduled him to be deported to Guatemala and sent him to yet another detention facility, this one in Kankakee, Illinois, Farrell said.

    After multiple phone calls, Farrell learned that immigration agents had requested the wrong type of interview with the asylum office. ICE acknowledged its mistake and took Arcenio off the manifest for a flight back to Guatemala, Farrell said. Arcenio passed his initial screening in March and is now waiting in detention to make his full case before an immigration judge later this month.

    Meanwhile, he is still being held in Kankakee, a four-hour drive from Farrell’s office. They can only speak by phone with 24 hours advance notice, Farrell said, and sometimes they are asked to limit calls to around 15 minutes when there are several people waiting for the phone.

    Siccing ICE on US citizens of hispanic appearance is not something that should be done lightly, as they will be detained, and it may take months for them to be released. Non-citizens who are legal residents may find their green cards cancelled without any reason being given. They may well get the mess sorted out, most do, but it can take months.

    It’s very much a case of “You can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride”.

    • Sue Dunim,
      Your first example is interesting. Since Guadalupe Plascencia had no actual knowledge that officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had inquired about her, the only thing she knew is what the deputy told her which is second hand information that could be false, people shouldn’t sign documents about events that that they are not personally aware of.

      Your second example is really not a good one as it relates to citizens; the person is actually an illegal immigrant so any discussion regarding citizens being bothered by ICE simply doesn’t apply. The person made their own bed by coming here illegally, they have to sleep in it, they are in the system due to their own illegal actions. The part about the appearance of being moved around to actually prevent them from talking to their attorney is a reasonable complaint and one that ICE should be fixing, if nothing else these detainees need to have enough advance warning of such moves so they have a reasonable opportunity to talk with their attorney before they are moved.

      P.S. I know people that live in Guatemala, gangs exist there just like they do in the United States but they don’t run the country. I’ve been to Guatemala, there are lots of areas that are not gang infested. Why did this person feel that they had to come all the way to the United States to get away from local gangs when there are literally other choices right in their own back yard? Heck Belize is a nice place and it’s close by; why travel somewhere between 1200 and 2500 miles when they could travel roughly 250 miles and still be in a similar climate and culture – but nooooo, they make the choose to come all the way to the USA and be an illegal immigrant here and people think I’m supposed to feel sorry for them – not gonna happen.

      Sue,
      Two things.

      First, what is the overall point of your comment; is it to smear ICE because they’re not efficient enough, because they can make mistakes, because some of their practices appear to be for purposes that we don’t condone, because they’re not “perfect”? Why did you post this comment?

      Second; you inserted these examples into your comment as if they are quotes from somewhere that you are using to support your arguments, as in proof that your arguments are true which can be taken as you are implying that these examples are a wide spread problem; however, you failed to site where you obtained these quotes from. I personally like to verify quotes provided so I can get the full context from the source; please provide links to both sources.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s