ACLU Sues State Police For Arresting Illegals
Posted on January 9, 2007
Once again the ACLU aim fire at law enforcement to defend imaginary rights of illegal immigrants furthering the decay of our national soverignty.
Steven Brown, director of the Rhode Island affiliate, yesterday noted the unusual nature of the lawsuit filed by ACLU volunteer attorney V. Edward Formisano … “The citizenship status of the plaintiffs is really irrelevant to this lawsuit. These were individuals who were in a van that was stopped for a minor traffic violation. The question is whether police have a right to detain individuals for no other reason than the way they look …”
Said Brown, “The law generally prohibits racial profiling on the highways. It prohibits stopping or searching vehicles based on the person’s race or ethnicity, all of which we think were present in this case. It also specifically bars police officers from detaining individuals in cars longer than necessary to address the initial traffic violation. From our perspective, that restriction was clearly violated in this case.â€
So, to the ACLU, the fact that those detained were actually law breaking illegal immigrants is ‘irrelevant’? Then why should any law be relevant? Instead they prefer to focus on what they ‘think’ might have happened. The central question is whether law enforcement has the ‘right’ to enforce the law. More specifically, whether local law enforcement has the right to enforce Federal law. All I have to say is that if they don’t, they should.
How would the ACLU react if it was the exact same case but police stopped a Middle Eastern man who turned out to be a terrorist rather than illegal immigrants? Would we then hear “the question is whether police have a right to detain individuals for no other reason than the way they look …”
Yes, sadly we most likely would.
The officer pulled over a van for breaking the law by changing lanes WITHOUT using a turn signal. Then he sees a van packed with fourteen people, none of which spoke English. Sounds like enough reasonable cause to ask for a few I.D.s to me. The bottom line on this case is that the law enforcement turned out to be right and are now being sued for what they should be applauded for.
Also see Polipundit
Liberally Conservative
Uncooperative Bloggers
» Filed Under ACLU, Border Control/Homeland Security, Illegal Activities, News
Trackback URL
Comments
10 Responses to “ACLU Sues State Police For Arresting Illegals”
-
Affiliations
The Giants
-
Donate
Steal Me
Our Store
Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
More blogs about the ACLU
I know you’re familiar with the concept of “probable cause”, Jay. It is a fact that some criminals get away because one of the “good guys” didn’t follow proper procedure. That’s the price we pay for having the presumption of innocence.
If the cops can demonstrate that they had cause to take the steps they took (without using the benefit of hindsight), they’ll win. If not, the “bad guys” will get away.
Stupid ACLU. Don’t they know that they’re supposed to abandon their principles when it becomes inconvenient? How could anyone respect an organization that sticks to it’s principles when it is politically dangerous to do so?
Stop the ACLU! The next thing they will do is take our guns! All they want to do is surrender to the terrorists! If you love this country you have to fight the do-badders, and they’re all around us! Support Bush on everything, no matter what!
Your complete lack of any legal training is blatantly obvious. Stop embarassing yourself.
I take it that the way to not embarrass myself would be to be completely anonymous like you?
Your complete lack of any legal training is blatantly obvious. Stop embarassing yourself.
Why should we be embarrassed? Have you been paying attention to the decisions coming out of our courts lately? The ACLU? Doesn’t exactly shine a favorable light on the profession.
I think the real question in this case is: “Can the police detain people for not being able to
produce proof of citizenship?” Speaking for myself, it’s very rare that I would have such proof.
A driver’s license doesn’t do it. I’ve been pulled over a few times, and I’ve never been asked
to prove I’m a U.S. citizen. The reason is probably that I don’t “look like” an illegal immigrant.
Another question would be, are passengers in a vehicle required to carry ID’s? Can we be detained
for not having ID’s?
In this case the officers’ hunches were correct, and I would like to think they would follow up on
them, using the information obtained legally from the van driver. But if I understand the story
correctly, the citizenship status of the passengers was not known during the traffic stop, which is
exactly the same situation I’ve been in every time I’ve been pulled over: citizenship unknown.
Would it have been acceptable for the police to have detained me? Ask yourself these things!
In this case the officers’ hunches were correct, and I would like to think they would follow up on
them, using the information obtained legally from the van driver. But if I understand the story
correctly, the citizenship status of the passengers was not known during the traffic stop, which is
exactly the same situation I’ve been in every time I’ve been pulled over: citizenship unknown.
Would it have been acceptable for the police to have detained me? Ask yourself these things!
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)
Enforcement
State and local law enforcement officials have the general power to investigate and arrest violators of federal immigration statutes without prior INS knowledge or approval, as long as they are authorized to do so by state law. There is no extant federal limitation on this authority. The 1996 immigration control legislation passed by Congress was intended to encourage states and local agencies to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws. Immigration officers and local law enforcement officers may detain an individual for a brief warrantless interrogation where circumstances create a reasonable suspicion that the individual is illegally present in the U.S. Specific facts constituting a reasonable suspicion include evasive, nervous, or erratic behavior; dress or speech indicating foreign citizenship; and presence in an area known to contain a concentration of illegal aliens. (yes…that would be considered “profiling”.)
Thank you, loboinok, that was helpful. I went and tried to read the part of the USC you
referenced, at a Cornell U hosted site:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/usc_sec_08_00001324—-000-.html
I actually did not find anything called “Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)”.
1324 is certainly about illegal aliens and such, but there is no (a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)
as far as I can see. Could you please include the stuff you think is relevant here? I tried to
figure out if the reference had a typo or something, but I couldn’t say for sure. Is it a new
part of the code? It’s also possible that I don’t know how to find things in the U.S.C. (not a lawyer!).
Because I don’t know what piece of the law you were referring to, I can’t tell if you think
it would be ok for the police to bring me in for questioning if I get pulled over and don’t have
proof of my U.S. citizenship.
Then I found the site I think you are quoting from, in the paragraph you posted. It actually continues
beyond what you included:
“Hispanic appearance alone is not sufficient. Immigration officers and police must have a valid
warrant or valid employer’s consent to enter workplaces or residences. Any vehicle used to
transport or harbor illegal aliens, or used as a substantial part of an activity that encourages
illegal aliens to come to or reside in the U.S. may be seized by an immigration officer and is
subject to forfeiture. The forfeiture power covers any conveyances used within the U.S.”
This, together with what you provided, is the complete quote as I found it on
http://www.mnforsustain.org/immigration_hiring_law_excerpts_from_us_code.htm . Is that
where you got it?
I think maybe the ACLU’s issue is that “Hispanic appearance alone is not sufficient.”
So, there are two steps here. If the interpretative paragraph that you and I together have provided
is accurate (first step), and if the detention occurred due to Hispanic appearance alone (step two), then
the ACLU would seem to have a case. Also, we have to agree on what “brief” means in the phrase
“brief warrantless interrogation”.
The ACLU isn’t about protecting civil liberties anymore but is all about left-wing racism
and protecting special rights for it’s preferred ethnicities. If these folks were illegal
eastern Europeans, the ACLU would not step in with this lawsuit. What ACLU racists want everyone
to do is not notice other folks ethnicity when they break American law, in this case hispanic ethnicity, when hispanic illegal immigrants are by far one group that feels it has the right to break American immigration law.
Recieve special treatment based on their “race”. This is hypocritical hogwash. We can’t break Mexican immigration laws as Americans and expect a Mexican ACLU equivalent to go to bat for us when we break laws, so why the double stanadard? The ACLU in this case believes Americans are stooges.