Living in Peru : your everyday companion

Peru's Congress to Support TPS for Illegal Aliens Living in the US

(LIP-ir) -- Peru's Congress will support in the efforts being made to have the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) granted to Peruvians illegally living in the United States, said Peru's President of Congress, Luis Gonzales Posada.

To reach this goal, Posada is to coordinate with the Peruvian American Political Organization (PAPO USA), an organization working on getting the TPS for undocumented Peruvians living in the US.

Once the goal is reached, between 500 and 600 thousand undocumented Peruvians will temporarily be allowed to remain in the US and have access to a job, said Peru's President of Congress.

"Members of Congress from all of the parties support this project. The arm of the State extends to all of our citizens, whether they are here or in any of the world's countries," affirmed Gonzales Posada.

Furthermore, the President of Congress noted the immense effort Peruvians living abroad were making by sending family members in their hometowns money. Posada reported that remittances in Peru exceeded $2 billion dollars a year.

The US grants the TPS to countries that have suffered natural disasters or civil wars. The Temporary Protected Status is valid for up to eighteen months and can be renewed.

"Peru has suffered natural disasters, no just the cold wave but the recent earthquake on August 15 in the southern region of the country, which caused numerous deaths and heavy material loss," stated Posada.

 | |

• Sports : Peru's Pan American chess champ raises $1,000 for Vietnam championship
• Law and Order : Lima University suspends students for extorting Peru businessman
• Transportation : Peru's transportation ministry hopes to reduce highway deaths 50 percent
• Transportation : Peru congress passes new law - Sets prison time for drunk driving
• Law and Order : Witness accusing Peru mayor of murder found dead

# forget it says :
21 November, 2007 [ 10:27 ]

There is no way this will happen. The US government is not even considering this idea. The Peruvian American Political Organization can dream but this is not realistic and this "news" story gives people false hope.

# Alberto says :
21 November, 2007 [ 10:33 ]

While I believe that all news concerning the government should be reported, I agree with the statement above. This is a futile request and hope for is should be abandoned. No one will honestly believe the Peru is in such a bad state that its own people can't return. Completely ridiculous.

# bob says :
21 November, 2007 [ 11:08 ]

Can some one explain what the benifts (other than not being deported from the US while this designation is in effect) is?

If thats the only benifet its pretty limited, as know one who is illegal is not going to all of the sudden come out and publize it.

If anyone can explain, how this desiganation would change the status for anyone illegal living in U.S. on a day to day basis (other than as i mentioned not being deported if found by the INS).

thanks

# mericorps says :
21 November, 2007 [ 12:33 ]

With TPS, the illegal Peruvians would be able to come forward and get valid documents.  They would, in turn, be able to get above minimum wage jobs and earn more money, pay more taxes and in return would spend more money in the US and send more money home to Peru.  They would also be able to get valid drivers liscences and car insurance and health insurance making them less of a financial risk to the US and allow them to return home to visit their families in Peru.

The downside, besides the debate as to whether this encourages illegal immigration or now, would be that they can no longer work for slave labor hours and wages and the Americans who exploit them will have to find other slaves.

# sprociremA says :
21 November, 2007 [ 13:31 ]

Wouldn't that mean that after the 18 month period they would then have to leave the country?   It says it can be renewed, but that would only be based on other traggic events.  Do I assume correctly? 

I agree with mericorps (wow, thats like twice now!?!?) that it would in a sense encourage illegal immigration.  It would also be a blow to those jerks that exploit people in what is basically slave labor.  I don't know what the solution is.  We do need some major immigration reform in the US.  Some great folks are denied visas, yet terrorists walk right across the border.  Bad deal if you ask me. 

# mericorps says :
21 November, 2007 [ 15:27 ]

do not worry, sprocierena, we did not acutally agree.  I only stated it would open that debate.  I have seen no convincing evidence that illegals swarm hoping for a natural disaster in their country later to make them legal.  In fact, I find that concept silly.  I do not buy the debate, I only said it will open the debate.

# elsa says :
22 November, 2007 [ 08:06 ]

The American business sector encourages illegal immigration. Wal-Mart, hotels, restaurants (big and small) love the influx of cheap labor. As a result, there are between 15-20 million undocumented people living in the United States. By and large, the American population does not want to do anything about it. One sector of the population would like to see everyone deported and the other wants them to remain illegal because an illegal workforce keeps labor costs low. There is a stand-off between the two sides and neither one is willing to compromise. This TPS status for Peruvians will never happen. Peruvians couldn´t get TPS while  70,000 of them were being killed by the government and Sendero Luminoso. What makes anyone think an earthquake will envoke sympathy from the US government?

# Dale says :
22 November, 2007 [ 11:43 ]

Elsa......... You are a realist of the highest order and have my complete respect....................

# Jose Alejandro says :
22 November, 2007 [ 14:39 ]

What's going on with you people? You are entitled to your personal  opinion. Regardless, we the people......better said, the immigrants who work so hard....to make our ends meet here in AMERICA the so called PROMISED LAND, we are continuosly, day in and day out, contributing to the greatness of this country....you should imagine what I am reffering to.....no matter what our immigration status is ...we are immigrants, and whether you believe it or not for the majority of white turkies we are considered 'second class citizens" and we are paying our dues, as such.
Anyone, who might say otherwise....revisit my beginning satement,above. I believe with TPS or without it, the change that we are going to experiment is very slim....We really need a true, honest and complete Immigration Reform Act...NOW....and this request with all due respect

# elsa says :
23 November, 2007 [ 13:32 ]

Jose Alejandro, you have missed the point. No one is saying that immigration to the United States is wrong. Everyone knows that the US was built by immigrants and they are the backbone of American society. I agree with you that complete immigration reform is needed. I would like to see a legal path to citizenship for all undocumented people living in the US. My point is that half of America wants to keep people illegal and exploit their labor and the other half are xenophobes who would like to see everyone deported. The US is at a stalemate right now and I don´t see that changing anytime soon. There may be hope with a new president in 2009 but not before.

# William Garland says :
23 November, 2007 [ 15:48 ]

Characterizing those opposed to amnesty (or whatever other lebel is placed on it) for illegal aliens as "xenophobes" is a classic example of casting those taking a particular position in an unfavorable light thereby avoiding addressing many serious concerns such as: (1) failure to enforce the law making illegal entry into US a misdemeanor for the first offense and felony for subsequent ones. See 8 U.S.C. 1325. (2) violating a first principle of justice by rewarding wrongful conduct, (3) giving these illegal aliens prefernece over lawful applicants since the illegal alien becomes regularized and can earn income in the US while the lawful applicant probably enjoys a lesser standard of living at home, (4) the systematic  violation of US sovereignity by Mexico through its (i) diplomats' improper interference in domestic US political matters, (ii)  aiding and abetting multiple violations of US laws, (iii) military's repeated violation of US borders, (iv) efforts to intimidate US citizens who oppose its views, (v) systematic efforts to export its social problems to the US rather than use its own assets to resolve them, (vi) draining money out of the US economy by remittances from its citizens in the US (which are its second largest source of foreign revenue after oil), (vii) repeated blatent double standard  in complaining about arms crossing from the US into Mexico while doing nothing to stop the flow of illegal aliens (and drugs) into the US and in enforcing its own strict laws against illegal immigration while demanding that the US not enforce its more modest measures.   Of course there are illegal aliens from other nations, but no other nation's numbers approach that of Mexico and no other nation approaches Mexico in its affronts to US sovereignity. 

# Jose Alejandro says :
23 November, 2007 [ 15:54 ]

Elsa, I do agree much the way you approach some of the issues, in connection with the granting of TPS to peruvian con-nationals.....I could not agree more, when you articulate that the US is at a stalemate, no change in the near future, and so on....but let me re-phrase myself by telling you the following: documented or undocumented, legal or ilegal, with a new president around the corner, the life of the immigrants across US shall remain the same, with few, very few exceptions...  particularly for those of us, coming from Central and South-America,whose background  made us the subject of a price tag stuck to our foreheads, reading the inscription...and this time paraphrasing Shakespeare...TO BE or NOT TO BE ...where  the hell we're going from here?...Elsa give me a  f '... break....We are f '... living in the melting pot......and believe it or not IT IS TOUGH any way, shape or form....the ball is in your court, by now....if you have  a reply ....you're always welcome...and I hope I'm not missing the point.

# mericorps says :
23 November, 2007 [ 22:51 ]

william garland, I would be very careful about the cut and past from a website that also promotes Eugenics, the "science" Hitler used to justify the Holocaust.

I am also curious why you ONY are concerned about the guilt of the illegal immigrants, but not a single word about our fellow Americans who exploit them?  Do you not have a standards that Americans should be held accountable for crimes against our country?

Nor do you discuss a thing about the GAO reports that make it very clear that our economy would take a hit that could potentially be as devestating as the depression.  No one to pull crops, housing costs rising, food costs out of reach.

And I agree with the GAO report that illegal immigrants cost taxpayers well over a billion dollars every year...but since they pay more than 2 billion dollars into the tax base, that would still mean a billion dollar tax loss every year..and that is only directly.

In parts of Arizona and Oklahoma that had a large population of illegal immigrants and the local law enforcement has pushed them out...either deporting them or moving them to other parts of the country...rentals are empty, small shops that serviced their needs..mom and pop stores that have been open for generations are closing, as are many of the farms and small factories they served.

I do not agree with illegal immigration, but I will not stand by anyone who quotes known racist websites as I believe that racism is a bigger threat to American freedom than illegal immigration and I do NOT belive the enemy of my enemy is my friend.  I also will not ONLY attack the Mexicans (while over 40% are not Mexican) and ignore the failures of our own citizens.  I will also not turn a blind eye to the financial impact.  Legal immigrants do not and will not work for the wages illegal immigrants work for and whild I consider that to be wrong, I am not so nieve to think that simply deporting illegal immigrants is the answer.

The problem is much to complex and we know too much information to think a shallow one sided approach would work.

And most Americans are too ethical to decide the entire burdon of the problem is on the back of the illegal immigrants.  WE ALL participated through lower prices, not making it an issue and continuing to shop at WalMart (convicted more than any other corporation for abusing illegal immigration, yet continuing to practice it).  My simple farmer grandfather told me...

If you are part of the problem, then, by God, you better be part of the solution.

It is called a good old fashioned American Citizenship ethic.

Or do you not believe in that?

# bob says :
24 November, 2007 [ 11:11 ]

I just wanted to know the benifits to illegals living in U.S.
for why i can tell, the only benifit is they cannot be deported.
So, since the vast majority are not deported i.e. will continue to live undetected, there is little advantage to these peruvians (unless of course to are one in a 20 million that gets caught and the INS decides to deport)???

# William Garland says :
24 November, 2007 [ 13:13 ]

Mericrops most recent post,  together with substantive points I will address,  makes a series of allegations against me that are false and exhibit the tactic mentioned in my previous post: labeling opponents with pejorative terms rather than seriously addressing issues.  More comments on the post follow:
(1) It claims I have "cut and  past(sic) from a website that also promotes eugenics . . ". In the post's sixth paragraph, the author declines to "standby while anyone quotes known racist websites" This is false. I did cut or past(sic) or quote any of my remarks from any other website. If Mericrops claims that I have done so, then identify the website and the language that I "cut and past" or quoted from it. 
(2) Mericrops tries to identify me with Hitler, a classic  example of associating  remarks with a despised person in an effort to discredit them.  Pin a disfavored label on those disagreeing with you to avoid serious discussion, just like the use of "xenophobes" addressed in my previsous post. 
(3) As to my addrssing illegal aliens and not those exploiting them, illegal aliens were the subject of the discussion. If not allowed into the country, successfully encouraged to leave or deported, they could not be exploited. If someone is illegally exploiting an illegal alien as, for example, by paying less than the minimum wage or maintaining dangerous work conditions, I favor prosecuting  both them for their violations and the illegal aliens for theirs. See also (10) infra.

(4) As to the GAO report, I find more credible the analysis of the Heritage Foundation report indicating that immigrants impose a net tax burden on society through at least the second generation. 
(5) I do not oppose immigration, only uncontrolled, illegal immigration some have estimated at over 21 million.  Our immigration policy should reflect the Canadian model which emphasizes admitting immigrants with skills Canada needs.
(6)In discussing parts of Arizona and Oklahoma the post says, among other things, that local authorities have "deported" persons.  Only the federal government has the deportation power, though courts are considering whether state and local laws may impose remedies on aliens violating federal law. Local officials cannot move anyone to any other part of the country(assuming another state is meant) as their police power is limited by the state's borders.
(7) In the discussion mentioned in (6), Mericrops points to a deprressed economic condition, which might be because illegal aliens have been enouraged to leave but just as well  could have been because illegal aliens have displaced lawful residents.

(8) The impression is given that I "attack Mexicans" but no other nation accounts for as large a number or percentage of illegal aliens and no other nation actively promotes violation of our laws and interferes in our domestic political affairs to the extent Mexico does, an ample justification for its particular mention.

(9) Mericrops claims not to be so "nieve"(sic) to believe that deporting illegal immigrants is the answer and tells us that a "one sided" approach will not work.  I agree  that enforced deportation is not the answer, but it is  part of the answer, coupled with enhanced border security, workplace enforcement, and limitation of public benefits to lawful residents. This will encourage illegal aliens to self deport and seek to reenter lawfully.  I emphasize enforcement first after the experience of the 1986 legislation that gave amnesty to 3 million plus aliens and promised enhanced enforcment.  Now there are over 20 million illegal aliens and we are again being asked to permit illegal aliens to avoid sanctions with promises of future enforcement.   Given the failure of the government to adhere to its word, most Americans are  not willing to repose the same trust again.
(10) I do not shop at WalMart. Since you tell us that this company has violated the law repeatedly, then increase sanctions until the company found violating the law more costly than obeying it or, where lawful, enter orders in personam against its executives  making them personally laible for future violations. 
(11) While the economics of the labor market may enable lawful residents to obtain higher wages and increase the price of some goods and services, that money is likely to be spent in our economy which will enhance it.
(12) The post would impose a burden on our society because we had  benefits from lower prices.  Illegal aliens in this country also purchased goods and services at these lower prices, and have no right to accrue any advantage from doing so, such as being made lawful residents.

(13) The post appeals to the American citizeship ethic.  A fundamental principle of that ethic, and indeed, of all ethical systems, is that no profit or advantage is to accrue from wrongdoing. 

# Alan says :
24 November, 2007 [ 14:01 ]

Thanks William - most of us allready figured out that Americorps or Mericorps is an idiot.

# William Garland says :
24 November, 2007 [ 14:12 ]

Alan,Thank you for your kind words.

In reviewing my prior post I note I deleted a word in (1), line 5 which should read, "I did not cut  .. . " rather than "I did. . . "

I apologize for the mistake.

# mericorps says :
24 November, 2007 [ 17:45 ]

The Heritage Foundation has funded Eugenics studies in the USA.

That alone should tell you something.

1. I do not post links to hate websites, but now you know that you are in bed with racists.

2. You are a bold faced liar, I said you quoted a website that also funds Hitlers science, and that is a fact.  i do not presume you are a NAZI, I think it is equally fair to assume you are maybe just stuipd or lazy to figure it out.

3. It is both nieve and silly to think that since there are no countries in the world that have ever been able to keep out all illegal immigrants, that we can suddenly start doing that now in our country, at least in a way that will not break our tax burdon.  No, if you REALLY were smart and serious about illegal immigration, you would reomove the opportunity, but your assinine approach is to keep the opportunity just add more barriers to get to it. 

4. Heritage foundation has funded many known racist organizations over the years, including ones listed on FBI watchlists and by President Jimmy Carter's organization.  Nice company for you to be in and the very reason this debate is never fruitful, when you are in bed with racists, whether by choice or ignorance, you are part of something sinister and destructive and dishonest.

5. I agree with you.

6. semantics is cheap and a tactic of someone who has nothing to say.  Of course I meant local authorities turned over or worked with federal authorities to clean out the illegals.  I am not even saying that is wrong, I am saying that if we are going to do it, we better have a plan in place to deal with the aftermath...the most serious part of my argument and one that you chose to ignor...telling.

7. Those suffering are not illegal immigrants but small American business.

8. I wonder why you mention nothing about how many illegal Americans are in other countries, or how many legal or illegal Americans in other countries do not speak the language.  How our country does nothing about that and your movement does not think it is important for the US to set the example.  Once again a double standard that you do not have to follow but others who do not follow are called evil.  again...telling.

9. your post is jibberish unless you can tell me how we can afford to get rid of them.  Round them up and ship them home would cost billions.  It would leave entire communities empty, and leave tens of millions of Americans in financial dire straights.  You just keep glossing over that one.  I understand, when you can not really address an argument, some people try to pretend it is not there and hopes it goes away.  This one will not, it is too well documented.

10. FINALLY, you hold at least 1 American corporation accountable for this mess.  Finally, you call for penalties for Americans breaking American laws.  Hmm, why so little so late?

11.  I remember what trickle down eceonomic theory did to us in the 80's, but I guess some never learn...bless your heart.

12. I find this to probably be the most distasteful of all your points second only to quoting a known racist organization, is that it is ok for us to have benefited from the fruits of this partnership, but they have no right to.  I am not in the habbing of sacrificing blood for a cheap greap, but clearly you are ok with the concept.  Telling.

13. But you seem to only apply that to one side, you are quite fine with the US beneifting from the illegal partnership.  If you beleived the crap you spit out, then you should say..hey...we used you and you used us.  Lets split the profits and everyone go home and call it a day. But you want to make the illegal immigrants suffer without any serious consequence to those in our country who created and benefitted and got rich on their backs.  I am not, of course, suggesting that, jsut following your course of though if you actually practiced what you pretend to preach.

I want them both to find justice.  I am fine with sending illegal immigrants home once we have something in place that will not dvestate our economy, I am also fine with making every corporation, politician and individual who earned their fortunes all or in part on the backs of illegal immigration to become responsible for the cost.  I am in favor of secure borders.. but unlike you, and clearly unlike Alan who has openly embraced racists and burning people alive...I think we ought to do it the American way.  I am a patriot, you have lost your sense of citizenship, old fashioned valued and the ethics of personal responsibility.

# William Garland says :
24 November, 2007 [ 22:36 ]

Mericorps latest post continues the ad hominem tactic of labeling those in disagreement, its latest example being the claim that  I am "in bed with racists."  I will not be silenced by such tactics. If, upon a challenge to provide the basis for allegations, a writer refuses to do so,I will leave it to the readers to assess that writer's credibility. 
(1) A reply to my first post asserted that that I had "cut and past"  from a website  now characterized as "racist".  I denied that I had "cut and past" any material from any website, asserting that the text  I wrote was my own. The reply fails to identify anything that I took from another website and now declines to document the claim.

(2) Next the reply calls me a liar, stupid and lazy, but another incident of ad hominen argument.  In mericorps first paragraph of the prior post wherein the claim is made that I "cut and past" materials, one will find the reference to Hitler.  I leave it to the reader to decide the intnet behind the refernece's inclusion. 
(3) As with almost every violation of law, it is not possible to apprehend 100% of the illegal aliens.  Lack of perfection in enforcement is hardly grounds to cease efforts, for it were, none of our criminal laws would be enforced.  Enforcement coupled with other measures such as denial of all but emergency public benefits, can seriously curtail illegal entry. 

(4) The reply's fourth paragraph continues the pattern of ad hominen argument claiming I am in bed with racists and that I am part of something sinister, destructive and dishonest.  I am not here to defend the Heritage Foundation, but invite the reader to visit its website and  make an independent judgment as to its character. The reply post having labeled those who disagree then avoids addressing the substantive argument  concerning illegal aliens' negative economic impact. 
(5) I applaud mericrops agreement.  Let's go forward and adopt the Canadian system to determine which immigrants we will admit.
(6) Mericrops original post claimed that local law enforcement "pushed out" immigrants and I pointed out that this could not be the case. Also see my paragraph (7) in which I question the conclusion as to the cause of the economic conditions. I have expressed no opposition to temporary labor permits where needed, but the need for farm labor is diminishing with enhanced technology.  For example, when I purchased blueberry farm twenty years ago,  harvesting was by hand and labor intensive.  Now, harvesting machinery with an operator and assistant can accomplish more in one day than  a crew of over 20 pickers.  As technology advances the demand for labor shifts and jobs formerly requiring large numbers of workers will often require fewer.
(7) You mention that small businesses may suffer.  These businesses were profiting off of illegal aliens.   While the small businesses may lose funds, there is no right to continue to profit from illegal aliens.  They made a  business judgment to service a particular population, knowing that their customer base was in the country illegally and took the risk that they might leave or be deported. 

(8) If US citizens are illegally present in other countries, those countries have the right to decide how to deal with their immigration status.  It would be improper for the US to tell those nations how to address their internal affairs,  just as it is improper for Mexico to interfere repeatedly in the US' internal political process by its efforts to influence legislation at federal, state and local levels. Mexico is used as an example because the greatest number of illegal aliens are Mexican and the Mexican government interferes in US internal political affairs to a greater extent than other nations.

9. The post ignores my admission that deportation is only part of the way to address illegal immigration.  The most efffective means is not deportation but creating the conditions that will cause illegal aliens to self deport, such as workplace enforcement and denial of public benefits. People will not be "rounded up", rather they will decide over time to leave and their departure will be a net gain for our economy since illegal aliens consume more in services than the taxes they pay.  If we agree on the Canadian system of  encouraging immigration by those with needed skills, these persons can take the place of  many of those leaving, and will be less likely to be public charges.

10. I addrressed the enforcment issue at the point I did because I was discussing mericropsfirst post in sequence.  I want the law enforced as universally as it can against all violators and have asserted that position for over 40 years. 

11. The reply speaks of "trickle down economic theory" but my post has nothing to do with that theory. It addresses the drain of funds from our economy by alien remittances to foreign countries.  For an ongoing summary of this drain see www.immigrationcounters.com

12. Again you have invoked the mantra of racism apparently in refernece to the Heritage Foundation. As in #4, I invite the reader to visit its website and make an independent judgment.  If an illegal alien has resided in and been employed in the US, then the alien must have found that condition more beneficial than residing in the alien's homeland, otherwise why did the alien leave home?  The alien has been employed and compensated for labor and certainly should not profit from its illegal activity by being allowed to remian in the country whilst others wait years for visas.

13. Again the reply's author seems incapable of discussion in a civil fashion, characterizing my discussion as "the crap you spit out".  I do not agree that the US has benefitted and there is certainly no "partnership" which must be founded on a lawful agreement. The US did not force these aliens to violate our laws, they chose to do so and like all lawbreakers should face the consequences, one of which is deportation or encouraged self deportation. The economy will not be devastated by the gradual exodus of illegal aliens and their replacement by immigrants possessing needed skills.

# Alan says :
25 November, 2007 [ 00:46 ]

At least he did not accuse you of having "openly embraced racists and burning people alive"

I would like to see the evidence of that posted too.  He is just a troll, for some strange reason hanging out on Living in Peru. 

# William Garland says :
25 November, 2007 [ 10:13 ]

Alan,
Thanks for your comment. Looking at things positively, I should give thanks having been spared one allegation. Clearly I an not alone in being subjected to ad hominem affronts. 

Bob,

You asked what benefits an illegal alien obtains from living in the US.  There are several: (1) Probably a higher standard of living, (2) While illegal aliens are subject to deportation, they enjoy the benefits of most civil and constitutional rights while in the US such as owning property, protection from civil rights violations, the extensive rights provided to defendants in criminal proceedings, the right to make and enforce contracts and the protections of labor laws. Please recall the widespread demonstrations in favor of so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" in which our nation's flag was burned and we were subjected to too many insults to list.  That conduct in most foreign nations will cause you serious consequences but we allowed the demonstrations to proceed. (3)Their children, whether or not bron in the US are entitled (by a decision of the US Supreme Court) to free public education through highschool, and in some states beyond that. 
(4) Depending on their income level, they may qualify for and receive free or discounted medical care and welfare benefits. (5) So-called sanctuary jurisdictions provide them local benefits without proof of lawful residency. (6) They may engage in commerce and enforce contracts. (7) The defeated immigration legislation would have entitled them to a special "Z" visa entitling them to remain in the US while those who apply for permanent residency visas may have to wait years. (8) Some jurisdictions are seeking to allow them to vote in local elections. I am sure there are other benefits I have not listed.

# mericorps says :
25 November, 2007 [ 18:32 ]

what a joke.

The passive agressive claim that poor innocent brother Garland suffers slings and arrows for stating an opinion is a bold faced lie and you look the fool for trying it.

When one lies as you did and quotes racist websites and refers to organizations that funds other organizations that are considered so violent that they are on FBI watch lists..those are not ad-hominim attacks, those go directly to your credibility, and on that ground you have failed.

It is even better, I love it when liars repeatedly post becuase they show themselves to be repeat liars.

For example, the courts have consistently ruled against any contract enforcement and labor compensation for illegal immigrants because, quite simply, an illegal contract is not enforcable.  Your claim to the contrary shows that you will say anything your arian brothers tell you without question.  Again, I am not sure if you are racist or stupid, but nonetheless you are working as their mouthpiece.

Since you feel your only recourse to to present false witness (I wonder if you try to label yourself as a Christian too?) to try and state your case...then you clearly are acting on faith and not facts.

You can join your nazi brother Alan and have a regular white only orgy all you want, but your and his repeated lies and his embracing of burning people alive have shown that you are the biggest threat to American freedom today, the anti-American terrorist within.

You are simply the worst our great country has to offer, luckily most realize that you are hateful extremist and not a part of the civilized society that defines our country.

# William Garland says :
26 November, 2007 [ 20:53 ]

Mericrops continues the ad hominem approach whilst cleaverly trying to shift the blame to others. He again accuses me of lying and says (referring in the third person) that "he quotes racist websites". I refer the reader to my prior statement that all I have written is my own work product and request that mericrops, who has as of yet  refused to identify the websites I am accused of quoting,  to  substantiate the allegation by identifying the  specific language allegedly quoted. 

Mericrops asserts that the courts have "consistently ruled against any contract  enforcement and labor compensation for illegal immigrants, because, quite simply, an  illegal contract is not enforceable.'' [The law distinguishes between a contract with an illegal subject matter, such as one to commit a crime, which is unenforceable and a legal contract made by an illegal alien,  which may be enforced.] Then mericrops says that my allegation contrary to the quoted langauge shows that I  will say anything my arian brothers [of which I have none] tell me without question and then he's not sure whether I am "racist or stupid" or a "mouthpiece".  Please see Reyes v. Van Elk, Ltd.  148 Cal. App. 4th 604(2007) finding that immigration status is not relevant to the right to enforce public contract prevailing wage rights.  A 2002 US Supreme Court decision, Hoffman v. Plastic Compounds, Inc., discussed by the Reyes court, barred a back wage claim for a firing of an illegal alien,  but not to bar a back wage claim for work actually done. Reyes observed that a long line of cases allow illegal aliens' to recover for work done. Kansas  recently adopted a similar position [Coma Corp. v. Coria, 2007 Kan. LEXIS 156] as did New York[Balbvena v. IDR Realty, LLC, 6 N.Y.3d 338 (Ct. App. 2006)] and Maryland [Design Kitchen & Baths v. Lagos, 882A.2d 817(Md. App. 2006)]. Similar lines of authority allow illegal aliens to enforce other contracts.

In addition to the benefits listed in answer to Bob's inquiry, the reader should know that our society affords illegal aliens subject to deportation hearings extensive rights.  For example, while a the proceeding is a civil one, aliens have been protected by applying the more stringent evidentiary requirements of criminal prosecutions.[Matter of Velasquez, 19 I & N Dec. 377 (BIA 1980)(Evidence obtained in violation of the 4th Amendment may be excluded in certain instances in deportation proceedings)].  Even voluntarily given information may be excluded applying the 5th Amendment's fundamental fairness requirement.  

[Matter of Toro, 17 I & N Dec. 340 (BIA 1980)]. A deportation may be voided for failure to adhere to certain regulations. [Waldron v. INS, 17 F.3d 511(2d Cir. 1994)] And, the rule has been extended to informal rules. [Montilla v. INS, 926 F.2d 162 (1991)(Operating instruction 287.3a) See In re Herrera-Priego, USDOJ EOIR.]

I leave it to the reader to conclude who has discussed the issues in a manner consistent with civilized discourse.

# Jose Alejandro Pinto says :
28 November, 2007 [ 18:23 ]

William Garland:

Any time that I read the particular way, that you have to argue the issues in questions above, especially those raised by mericorps, I believe that I am reading arguments sort of lawyerly, tailored by someone who has a legal professional training, as a modus vivendi.

The so called latin phrase "ad hominem" really requires a translation and/or meaning in the context that you are using it. Your knowledge of Contract Law, and citations from Supreme Court Decisions, as well as BIA opinions makes me think that you are very familiar with Case Law.

Any way, readers like myself, enjoy the kind of writing supported by selected Administrative and federal Court Case Law presented by Garland and still unchallenged by mericorps.

Keep on writing William.... in the alternative, don't ever stop writing. 

# William Garland says :
28 November, 2007 [ 19:28 ]

To: Mr. Jose Alejandro Pinto

Dear Mr. Pinto,

Thank you for your kind comments and encouragement.  You asked about the phrase "ad hominem" (also known as "argumentum ad hominen") which is indeed  latin and refers to a discredited practice in logical discourse: addressing the argument at the person rather than the merits of  what the person says about the  issue being discussed.   For examples, trying to pin a label on a person, such as Nazi, fascist, communist or saying their opinion is a "bald faced lie" or a person is "stupid"  "lazy" or a "mouthpiece" in an effort to discredit the person's argument rather than addressing its merits would  are examples of  ad hominen remarks. 

You are correct in your in your beleif that I have legal training.  I teach in a law school.  

# mericorps says :
28 November, 2007 [ 21:57 ]

Willie,

Quoting racist websites and caught in falsehoods, lies or evasions of the truth are not ad-hominim atttacks, they go directly to the credibility....and you have lost yours.  That is significant and pertinent to the discussion.

Your bloged source omits many facts that sort of make you look foolish.

The first cases you cited show that that the particular argument was not usable as a defense against fair wages claims, but that was only one of several arguments and while they did win that case, the particular plaintiffs actually did not prevail in the sawsuit.  No wages for them becasue they were illegal.

Hmmm, wonder why that part was left out?

Your second point is also not quite as it appears...it basically says that our government can not use evidence gained violating our Constitution.  I guess you can find many exceptions to void the eternal document that is the foundation of American freedom, but to me it is like a sacred text. 

Same with your third point.  Americans are obligated to follow our rule of Law and Constitution.  It is the American way of freedom and democrocy, it is what makes us the best nation on earth.  You may feel it is easy to destroy the rule of law if the guilty are bad enough.

Still, you hold a standard for the illegal immigrants, that they can not break the law under any circumstance that you clearly do not hold for your fellow Americans.  You betray the very Constitution of the United States.

# Elsa says :
29 November, 2007 [ 14:24 ]

Gentlemen, I´m jumping back into this conversation. Although I am probably beating a dead horse.

Mr. Garland: Are you serious in denying that a xenophobic sentiment exists in the United States right now? I admit my post was an oversimplification of the issue but I stand by my statement that a stalemate exists on the immigration issue because of xenophobia and corporate interests. What do you propose the U.S does with 12-20 million undocumented people living in the U.S. How about a real answer instead of the legalese?

José Alejandro: I understand the plight of immigrants all too well. No one promised life would be easy in the U.S. I don´t understand your question/comment about the "f-ing" melting pot. Are you upset that new immigrants to the U.S get paid less than those born in the U.S? You wouldn´t be the first to make this complaint. Ask the Africans who were brought as slaves how they felt about working for free. As the Irish and Italian immigrants in the 19th Century how they felt about their labor situation. As me how I feel about getting paid less than a man for doing the same work. Life isn´t fair. Get used to it.

# William Garland says :
29 November, 2007 [ 16:49 ]

Mericrops continues the practice of  ad hominem remarks and making allegations and when challenged refusing to substantiate them.
1.  Again the latest post refers to "quoting racist websites" and having previously declined to identify the claimed quoted sites upon an assertion that "I do not post links to hate websites, . . ".  None of my writings in this discussion have quoted any website and in my post of 26 November 2007 [20:53] asked mericrops "to substantiate the allegation by identifying the specific language allegedly quoted." The reader can see from mericrops post of 28 November 2007 [21:57] that it identifies no allegedly quoted language. 
2.  In the course of denying ad hominem attacks mericrops proceeds to make another one, "Quoting racist websites and caught in falsehoods, lies or evasions of the truth are not ad hominem attacks, they go directly to credibility. . . and you have lost yours." I have stated no falsehood and quoted no website.
3. Mericrops claims "falsehoods, lies or evasions" but provides no specifics.
4. The claim is that I have a "blogged source".  I  cited judicial and administrative authority. 
5. The cases I cited [Reyes, Coma Corp., Balbvena and Design Kitchens & Baths ] were to refute mericrops claim that "the courts have consistently ruled against any contract enforcement and labor compensation for illegal immigrants. . . "  If illegal immigrants were not permitted to enforce contracts, each of the cases would have been summarily dismissed and not resulted in the reported opinions.
6. The citations regarding constituitional protections were provided to show the extensive rights provided defendants in deportation proceedings. The discussion about voiding deportations for rule violations was also included to show the rights afforded the claimed illegal alien, and how these rights have been applied even in informal matters.
7. Mericrops claims that I would hold illegal immigrants to a standard (not break the law under any circumstance) that "you clearly do not hold for your fellow Americans" and that I "betray thue very constitution of the United States." This conveniently ignores mine of 24 November [13:13] which stated that if illegal aliens were exploited and subjected to dangerous working conditions, prosecution was in order for the violations, and referring  to WalMart's claimed repeated violations, called for inceased sanctions until the companied complied and possible in personam orders against its executives.
14. Mericrops has, in the course of several days, repeatedly failed to engaged in civil discourse and relied on personal insults:
     

# William Garland says :
29 November, 2007 [ 16:52 ]

The prior comment was inadertently posted without completing the evidence of lack of civil discourse and personal insults:
 

# William Garland says :
29 November, 2007 [ 17:24 ]

I apologize for the malfunctioning of my computer in making premature posts.  The referenced ad hominen insults are:  23 November 2007 [22:51]: (1)"cut and past(sic) from a website that also promotes Eugenics" when nothing was taken from any website, (2) "quotes known racist websites", 24 November 2007 [17:45] (3) "you are in bed with racists", (4) "you are maybe just stupid or lazy. . ", (5) "bold faced liar", (6) "your assine approach", (7) "you are part of something sinister and destructive and dishonest", (8) "quoting a known racist organization",   (9) ". . . sacrificing blood for a cheap greap, but clearly you are ok with that concept. . .", (10) "the crap you spit out", (11) "you have lost your sense of citizenship", 25 November 2007 [18:32]: (12)" bold faced lie", (13) "lies as you did", (14) "your arian brothers", (15) "I am not sure if you are recist or stupid but nontheless you are working as their mouthpiece", (16) "you find your only recourse is to present false witness", (17) "(I wonder if you try to label yourself as a Christian too)",
(18) "have a regular white only orgy all you want", (19) "you are the biggest threat to American freedom today" (20) "the anti American terrorist within", (21) "the worst our great country has to offer", (22) "you are a hateful extremeist and not part of civilized society that defines our country", (23)"Qoting racist websites and caught in falsehoods", (24)". they go directly to credility. . .  and you have lost yours", (25) "You may feel it easy to destroy the rule of law if the guilty are bad enough.", (26) "You betray the very constitution of the United States."

# voice of people says :
30 November, 2007 [ 14:08 ]

everyone deserves an opportunity to make their dreams come true, and with an illigal status in this country, unfourtanetly it is not possible. There is nothing wrong with giving opportunity to Peruvians succeed, sending they kids to college and such.

# el chato says :
25 February, 2008 [ 17:41 ]

well let me tell all of the ppl thst thing that all immigrants illigaly or legaly should go back to their countries. we dont choose when to come and went to go, some of us just have to go by what our parents say. illigal immigrants suffer a lot while americans leave a good life. there is no american that would work for 8 dollars an hour an less he or she is really stupid. they dont have to worrie wether they will be coming home or get cut by "LA MIGRA". that mentality is always on ppls heads, that is not easy to leave with is it?. plus tps it willreally help peruvians in this country to better themselves even tho the will still be working for a minimum wage. Its because of immigrants that this country was build. Or can same one tell me what the hell does the statue of liberty means then? I know the pain and the suffer of being an illegal immigrants. I was one myself but not because i choose to be but because my parents were strugguling in my country. know im legal resident and in 2 month citizen. thats why i know that the tps is a good help from us to the ppl that are needing it. any one that has something to say about my comment fell free to write me wether u disagree with me or not my email is roca_430@hotmail.com