Immigration Enforcement Targets (?) Schools
[Guest post by DRJ]
The El Paso Times reports that law enforcement authorities in a small New Mexico community conducted an immigration raid in area high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools that resulted in the deportation of 28 illegal immigrant parents and children. I predict a lawsuit.
Note: Thanks to careful readers Robin Roberts and Tim, this immigration raid might not have targeted the schools but occurred incidental to community-wide raids. I’ve updated the title to reflect that.
— DRJ
When I registered my daughter for school, I needed her birth certificate for proof of age. I also needed official ID to prove that I was the daddy named in the birth certificate. Then I needed proof of residence in the district. I was very well “documented”. How do the illegals do it unless the schools are bending the rules for them?
Still, this kind of “enforcement”, involving innocent children, is sad.
nk (474afa) — 9/15/2007 @ 2:21 pmI did not read the article as stating that the immigration enforcement effort “targeted” schools.
There was a comment about picking up children at schools but stated that the parents or guardians of those children were “present”. And that as a result illegal immigrants were keeping their children out of schools, but I don’t think that establishes that schools were the “target”. In fact, the article describes going to people’s houses etc. rather than targeting schools.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/15/2007 @ 2:26 pmI think this was not an “enforcement” operation involving innocent children. Instead, I think adults who were illegally in the country were detained and during questioning they advised that they had minor children in local schools at that time. The detained adults were offered the option of returning to Mexico without a formal deportation hearing and were offered the opportunity to bring their children with them rather than abandoning them in the United States. In my experience, law enforcement officers and immigration officers are concerned about unsupervised minors and will give a detained individual the opportunity to make some arrangements, including having the minor accompany the adult to Mexico. This is true regardless of the citizenship of the minor.
Tim (347b6a) — 9/15/2007 @ 2:28 pmThis was an interesting graph: “Some law enforcement officials, such as El Paso Police Chief Richard Wiles, have said they would do everything not to appear to be enforcing immigration laws.”
Edward (7d0e2d) — 9/15/2007 @ 2:55 pmInteresting that some of the 911 calls were said to be fabricated.
I really doubt it will get noted by the anti-amnesty crowd but there has been at least one instance of a handicapped child being deported from California after being picked up by the police. All good until you find out he was a LEGAL citizen. If my child looked the least bit like he or she could be mistaken for a Hispanic I would take them out of school.
Expect more of the same as police departments let fear and ignorance begin to drive the law into hands that don’t have the authority.
traffic violations are misdemeanors — why aren’t the swat teams knocking down doors on those “evil lawbreakers”?
Seriously, this is not the way to address the problem. What will begin to happen is that people opposed to this abuse of authority will begin to report bogus 911 calls at homes of known “anti-amnesty” advocates who applaud these tactics. A few times of having the swat team bust down the doors for a bogus “armed suspect has hostage” may cool the ardor of those who condone these tactics.
voiceofreason (c0500d) — 9/15/2007 @ 3:42 pmI don’t think it’s likely in this case, but some of the raids elsewhere could be designed intentionally to provoke opposition. Chertoff has implied as much, saying that we’re going to be seeing families torn apart.
As I’ve indicated several times, perhaps this site would like to consider a much better way to oppose illegalimmigration rather than its current path of highlighting crimes and the like.
Namely, discrediting those who promote or excuse illegal immigration, including bloggers, reporters, politicians, and organizations.
For instance, if someone went to a campaign appearance and asked a question like this and then uploaded the response and publicized it, it would have an impact many, many times greater than all the posts about criminal illegal aliens.
TLB (0c89cb) — 9/15/2007 @ 3:59 pmvoiceofreason, cute, but I don’t suggest you talk yourself into your tactic. Such would actually rebound on the pro-amnesty movement and only reinforce the existing strong sentiment in this country against condoning illegal immigration. A sentiment that is not going away.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:25 pmOne of the back-burner issues in this area (back-burner but still simmering) is the property tax assessment that helps fund schools. It’s not insignificant.
No one can come up with figures, but some parents and educators assert that ISDs in the El Paso area have up to 30% illegal students. That figure, though not confirmed, underpins part of the resentment over the high property tax rate.
Illegals who want to attend US public schools in the area will reside with a legal relative, or at least provide that relative’s local address.
Cross-border flow between Chihuahua and TX/NM is astoundingly robust, given school and medical opportunities on the US side, as well as lower prices on many (many, many) items for shoppers. Another reason for flow are the families with relatives on both sides of the border (usually legal entries, BTW).
Finally, I guess there’s a reason CBP/OFO has “school” lanes in the El Paso POEs.
4 Borders Pundit (ac3367) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:28 pmRobin Roberts,
Nothing cute about tactics that are unacceptable. If just ONE legal citizen is deported, hurt or killed because we want to bend or break the rules our law enforcement folks are bound by, it is NOT worth it.
You don’t like the status quo – then I suggest you get off your duff and change it through the processes and procedures our constitution proscribes. Not by adopting illegal search and seizure tactics prohibited by the constitution.
You make a lot of noise about the illegal immigrants being law breakers and the need to deport them because our constitution guarantees our protection. You are suggesting nothing less than suspending some of those protections “for the greater good” — again all great until it is you that gets tossed out without due process despite your US citizenship.
Being selective about which parts of the constitution you support is as transparent as it is pathetic. Crying constantly about one misdemeanor offense and drastic measures while ignoring the slew of other misdemeanor offenses is equally hypocritical.
voiceofreason (c0500d) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:38 pmvoiceofreason, first of all, you make false accusations about what I make a lot of “noise” about. I guess this makes it easier for you to feel comfortable arguing with someone who you’ve created in your mind rather than real people. I find it unimpressive.
Second, with respect to your claim “If just ONE legal citizen is deported, hurt or killed because we want to bend or break the rules our law enforcement folks are bound by, it is NOT worth it”, you are late to that party too.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:46 pmOh, and I have no idea where you get this horse manure:
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:47 pmRobin Roberts,
You make claims which you cannot back up. Are you Kreskin? You are stating an opinion about “sentiment”, nothing more and nothing less.
As for the horse manure, if you haven’t read the constant drumbeat of they are lawbreakers – they must be deported, then I can only surmise that your head is buried firmly where that manure is formed.
I’m not pro-amnesty. I am pro-constitution; ALL OF IT.
voiceofreason (c0500d) — 9/15/2007 @ 4:58 pmTorturer of reason:
Can you cite proof of your assertion? Somehow I am willing to bet that there is no credible source.
Thomas Jackson (bf83e0) — 9/15/2007 @ 6:06 pm#13
Proof of assertion?
Ok see my posts – that is proof I asserted.
Try using words you understand.
voiceofreason (679e69) — 9/15/2007 @ 7:20 pmWell, it didn’t take long for voiceofreason to drive off the cliff.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/15/2007 @ 7:32 pmYes, occasional mistakes will be made in deporting some who are in the USA legally. No law enforcement procedure is guaranteed to be free of mistakes, but we need them just the same. Consider the innocent victims of traffic accidents. They are all sacrifices to Chevy, the God of Transportation, for the sake of our mere motoring convenience, but they will continue to be sacrificed at the rate of 30,000 per year or so.
dchamil (740e28) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:09 amnk–The school I worked at in Nevada required a birth certificate, two forms of address verification, and papers demonstrating custody of the kid. Often, the legal IDs (birth certificate, custody papers) originated elsewhere than the U.S., but they were still accepted. As long as these requirements are met, it isn’t the school’s role to discern the legal status of the kids or their parents.
Tom (909acb) — 9/16/2007 @ 4:59 pm#16
voiceofreason (be1ec0) — 9/16/2007 @ 5:02 pmAs long as it is not your family or friends I suppose alles ist gut? You would probably find a few compounds of Aryans in the Northwest who would love your thoughts.
Robin Roberts and Tim,
If this ACLU post is right, you may be correct that this did not target schools but involved community raids where children were removed from school to join their parents. A similar incident happened last April in Chaparral NM.
Thanks for pointing this out. I will note this in the original post.
DRJ (4725f3) — 9/16/2007 @ 5:30 pmThanks DRJ.
I see that voiceofreason is doing an AJL impression – ie., the goal of every thread is to be able to call one’s opponents nazis.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/16/2007 @ 5:46 pmRobin, Robin…
voiceofreason (be1ec0) — 9/16/2007 @ 6:09 pmStalking via the internet is unhealthy. Stick to the subject. Do you agree with Dchamil’s observation or not?
DRJ,
The community wide raids are problematic (I think) on legal grounds. The second reference below quotes a Supreme Court opinion.
The ACLU article stated
“LAS CRUCES, NM—The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico condemned recent immigration raids by Otero and Doña Ana County Sheriff’s deputies in the border towns of Chaparral and Vado today. The local police agencies are assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to conduct sweeps of immigrant neighborhoods, knocking on doors and checking identification. Authorities also are stopping motorists and entering private businesses.
The ACLU is investigating multiple reports that sheriff’s deputies retrieved children from schools and entered homes without consent or warrants. The ACLU has filed public records requests with both sheriff’s departments seeking information about the collaboration with federal immigration agencies.”
from
http://policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=224&issue_id=22004
Applicable Court Decisions
Fourth Amendment: The U.S. Supreme Court has said in U.S. v. Brignoni-Ponce that the protections of the Fourth Amendment still apply to situations where police detain an individual for investigation of immigration violations.2 The Court stated,
Although we may assume for purposes of this case that the broad congressional power over immigration [citation omitted] authorizes Congress to admit aliens on condition that they will submit to reasonable questioning about their right to be and remain in the country, this power cannot diminish the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens who may be mistaken for aliens. For the same reasons that the Fourth Amendment forbids stopping vehicles at random to inquire if they are carrying aliens who are illegally in the country, it also forbids stopping or detaining persons for questions about their citizenship on less than reasonable suspicion that they may be aliens.3
voiceofreason (be1ec0) — 9/16/2007 @ 6:44 pmIn other words, the Fourth Amendment prohibits police officers from stopping or detaining a person on less than reasonable suspicion even when the suspected violation relates to illegal immigration.
voiceofreason, dchamil’s observation did not justify your cheap namecalling. As for stalking, projection seems to be another of your bad habits.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:00 pmRobin Roberts,
voiceofreason (be1ec0) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:03 pmI called him no names. I do note that you dodged the question on whether you agree with his sentiment or not.
VOR #22,
There is a difference of opinion about what prompted the raids:
While these positions seem like polar opposites, warrants were issued so there should be a paper trail that may shed some light on what happened.
DRJ (4725f3) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:09 pmDRJ,
Thanks for the reply. I hope they do have a paper trail and the rest of the story is published.
I get riled about the illegal search and seizure tactics primarily because I have a child who gets stopped by the cops simply because he “looks” Hispanic, which he isn’t. He is a legal citizen as well.
voiceofreason (be1ec0) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:18 pmIt is hard for some to understand how having less rights than others does matter until one is on the receiving end of that equation.
voiceofreason, all can read your #18 and see that you are calling dchamil a nazi. As to agreeing, it would seem an obvious observation that all human processes have error rates and consequences thereof. That was dchamil’s observation. There is no reason to “dodge” that fact. And that you see this observation of a fact of life as being worthy of calling someone a nazi is informative.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/16/2007 @ 7:46 pmDRJ,
I cannot find the part about warrants. Have tried posting this thread without success a couple of times?
voiceofreason (5a07b1) — 9/16/2007 @ 8:18 pmVOR,
From the El Paso Times link in the original post:
The inference is that law enforcement ran across the illegal aliens while pursuing other law enforcement matters.
As for “tried posting this thread,” I’m not sure what you mean. Are you having problems linking something and/or following my link? FWIW, the spam-filter here is sensitive and often kicks out my comments. (In fact, I tried to link the El Paso Times article in this comment and the spam-filter booted me.)
DRJ (4725f3) — 9/16/2007 @ 8:50 pm