3
Showing posts with label E Verify. Show all posts
Showing posts with label E Verify. Show all posts

Friday, May 27, 2011

U.S. Supreme Court...Arizona E Verify Immigrantion Law upheld by Justices!





Today, the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona was within its rights to require employers to check the legal status of their workers before hiring.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce brought a lawsuit against the state over the legal measure on the grounds that enforcement of E-Verify Laws was exclusively in the purview of the federal government.

Surprisingly, the four Justices who sat on the U.S. Supreme Court, tipped their hand when they gave clear and obvious signs at oral argument that they were inclined to rule in favor of the appellant (Arizona).

The final decision was 5 - 3.

Justice Elena Kagan did not vote in the case because of a potential conflict.

Kagan bowed out on the grounds that her previous position as Solicitor General in the Obama administratio
precluded herself from participating in the landmark case.

Although sweeping immigration reforms (instituted in 1986) barred most States the right to enforce immigration laws, there was a loophole which the appellants were able to drive a spike through.

Lawmakers left one clause in 1986 pertaining to “all licenses necessary to operate the businesses" which cinched it for Arizona in a nutshell.

John Roberts noted in his "Opinion" on behalf of the U.S. Supreme Court that Arizona is entitled to enforce its employment-verification requirement through licensing laws which turns out to be a clear opening for other states similarly situated.

“We hold that Arizona’s licensing law falls well within the confines of the authority Congress chose to leave to the states and therefore is not expressly preempted,” Roberts wrote with a nod from his peers on the Court.

In the wake of the ruling, it is anticipated that other states will now follow suit, to put a lid on the hiring of illegal immigrants in the United States which has been escalating out-of-control over the past year.

The high court’s findings in respect to the narrower employer-focused law signals that states have some leeway in passing laws similar to Arizona’s now-infamous immigration law.

A federal E-Verify requirement law is also in the works.

“I am pleased the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the Arizona E-Verify law and their right to revoke business licenses for employers that knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Not only is this law constitutional, it is commonsense," beamed House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) who is introducing the measure on the Federal level.

On the heels of this ruling, some Arizona lawmakers are hopeful that another case going before the U.S. Supreme Court in the near future, requiring that local law enforcement officers check for the legal Immigration Status of an arrestee will be successful as well.

News at 11!

http://www.thetattler.biz


Sunday, December 27, 2009

Illegal immigrants...Special Order 40 flies in face of common sense! Outdated law a joke...

Police Chief's deterrent for Illegal Immigration!



Bring me your humbling masses!




A few weeks ago, I was quite shocked by a  news report out of Texas that a Mayor of one of their fair cities was engaging in an all-out mean-spirited attempt to purge his town of illegal immigrants by ignoring State and Federal Laws in respect to apprehension, detainment, and deportation.

The city Official was clearly ignoring binding legal procedures (due process, for starters), and it irked me.

In the final analysis, the misguided politician has been stepping on the toes of Federal agents at U.S. Homeland Security, who have been charged with a responsibility he has been trying to usurp.

On the other hand, the Los Angeles Police Chief's strict adherance to the thirty-old law - Special Order 40 - has gone too far the other way; in fact, Chief Charlie Beck's  pig-headed approach borders on ignorance, incompetence, and a lack of foresight.

According to a Los Angeles Times editorial recently, the measure is not only controverisal, but vital.

I thoroughly disagree for a couple of reasons.

While I do not believe that the LAPD (and the Sheriff's Department) shouldn't willy-nilly target individuals at the curb of downtown streets as they pine for day work - for example - on the other hand I firmly believe that exercising a little intelligence (and common sense) during the arrest process doesn't amount to any breach of an individual's rights.

To use an analogy, let's say, an officer pulls over a motorist for driving with a broken tailgate light - and that during the course of the ticketing proedure - the officer discovers that the motorist doesn't have a license.

Should the cop ignore that fact and just issue a citation for for the brake-light violation?

No, sir!

Upon discovering that an individual being charged with a crime is an illegal alien, shouldn't the police department - as a matter of form - report the prisoner's illegal status to Homeland Security so that the Federal Government can take appropriate action (if they so desire)?

That appears to be the common-sense way to deal with the situation.

But, because a myriad of government agencies (and their officials) have continually dropped the ball in this regard over the years, the immigration problem has been allowed to reach epic proportions in this country today.

It strikes me as ludicrous that officers are being  advised by the Chief of  Police (wet behind the ears, obviously) to wantonly disregard the obvious.

Notwithstanding, the thirty-year old law is outdated, and should be sent by way of the dinosaur.

Indeed!

Because the United States is one of the most sophisticated nations in the world, capable of instituting a fool-proof system to halt illegal immigration (and surreptitious sneaks across the border), it boggles the mind to think that nothing has been accomplished in that regard.

Canada, France, and England - for starters - have managed quite nicely (thank you very much) coral the immigration problem from the get-go.

Why can't Homeland Security and the Department of Justice use a little high-tec American know-how to accomplish the same?

In the final analysis, were I a suspicious so-and-so, I'd hazard a guess that lobbyists in Washington are stalling and delaying the efforts for E-Verification - and a National ID card, too - to ultimately ensure that cheap labor is available to their penny-wise corporate masters.

And, American tax-payers be damned!

I'm all for - civil rights, due process, and what-have-you - but I also support intelligent action, common sense, and the right of  U.S. residents to demand that the flow of immigrants be through the front door (and not the back one a handful of greedy self-serving politicians would prefer).

Amen!






Friday, August 28, 2009

Phonetics...when you don't know a rat's a** about English! Fake it...




In recent months, an intriguing phenomenon has reared its curious head in Los Angeles.

Of course, as you are no doubt aware, there has been a big brouhaha around the country about illegal immigrants, their right to work in the U.S. pending legal documentation, and the need for Immigration reform.

One of the pet peeves out here on the West Coast pertains to English (plain and simple).

If you reside in Los Angeles - chances are - you get frustrated when you saunter into a fast-food take-out joint and needlessly encounter difficulties in placing an order because the workers are not fluent in English.

Your stomach growls - aches for chow - but that stumbling block has to be bridged first before the tasty morsels arrive in the neat little cardboard box decorated with the McDonald's logo on is face.

A phrase a jailer barked in a prison yard in the critically-acclaimed film - "Cool Hand Luke" (which starred Paul Newman) - springs to mind in this circumstance.

"What we have here is a failure to communicate!"

The staff manning the take-out counter are probably Latino with little or no education.

Since English is not their mother tongue, problems often arise when a customer attempts to translate the specifics of a menu choice into a comprehensible image that the server will understand (and act on).

Yup!

The hungry consumer may have to conjure up a bit of amusing sign language (tap dance a little, too) in a bold-faced effort to drive the point home successfully.

If that bit of ingenuity doesn't engender the proper response, he or she may have to pray for Divine Intervention.

But, the Manager may be in the same boat, or just got off of one.

Oy veh!

When all else fails, the customer may have to rudely stab a finger at one of the slick ads on the menu overhead to indicate a choice, and trust that the gesture alone will rustle up some grub pronto on the heels of two little words.

"Uno, please."

On the heels of ICE breathing down employers' backs, and vows from the Government that E-Verify will be instituted in the near future to prevent illegal immigrants from working on these shores, I noticed that a handful of workers at McDonald's and Jack-in-the-box disappeared from service.

And, in the interim, the order process was streamlined and simplified sufficiently enough - that a meager understanding of English - was only required.

For instance, a system was devised whereby a hapless employee without English fluency need only punch in the order number, enter the sum paid by the customer, and hand back a balance due that was tabulated electronically by the restaurant computer.

Workers - capable of handling the pressure in this seat-of-the-pants scenario - were able to hold onto their jobs.

Unfortunately, the hopelessly challenged were forced to move on.

Even still, a posse of Americans stayed focused on the growing problem of undocumented workers who were unable to communicate effectively in the recognized language of the land.

Subsequently, a mind-boggling transformation surfaced in the workplace almost overnight.

For example, one day when I was munching on my high-calorie trans fat burger and fries, a worker uttered up a chorus of intriguing sounds that were vaguely familiar!

The startling event (I learned later by closer observation) was prone to arise when a customer interacted with a member of the staff.

Yup - out-of-the-blue one day - a Latino server actually greeted a customer when he waltzed up to place an order for lunch

But, the landmark event was ripe with a curious twist to it.

Because my ears are still razor sharp and sound as a bell - I managed to zero in on subtle nuances in the speech patterns - that led to a Eureka moment.

When the Latino sang out the intended phrase - good morning - the words were cut short (fell off the plateau) before the notes hit the air and and landed on their intended target!

It suddenly struck me what had just occurred.

The young Latino man was using phonetics to disguise his lack of fluency in English.

It was not only obvious to me how he did it, but why the situation developed in the unceremonious way it did.

You see, most individuals with a modicum of intelligence - even a touch of logic and common sense - are capable of figuring out the "obvious" in a situation (especially where there is a need for survival).

This fellow - like many others I've come across in recent months - wisely observed that when a customer walked through the door they usually spoke a word or two.

And, when exiting - likewise - tended to say a few parting words.

Understandably, it dawned on him after reflecting on the situation, that if he copy-catted the same "sounds" customers transmitted when they came and went - that he would give the impression he understood the language and was able to elucidate fluently in English.

Remarkable!

But, there was one major problem to contend with.

Not everyone speaks audibly (or enunciates correctly) when conversing with another individual.

Also, a person's failure to project the words and phrases properly, could conceivably stunt the sounds and cause them to be misunderstood.

Hence, the listener may not be able to discern the exact pronunciation - and more importantly - be able to fathom how to form the words and sing them out correctly in the future by way of their own vocal chords.

Notwithstanding, because the individual has probably never seen the word(s) in print - or been taught their origins, what they mean exactly, etc. - the phonetic attempts to discern the correct speech patterns for conversational purposes would be hindered considerably.

But, the untrained ear (or one that was not listening intently) might be fooled.

Not moi!

On the occasion that I happened across the curious phenomenon, I distinctly heard the Latino man misspeak with earnest.

"Ave a goo dai"

Say what?

I sure hope it won't be gooey, I chuckled to myself.

To test my theory, one day I quizzed an employee  about a subject that wasn't related to the order process.

Uh-huh!

His eyes went wide, jaw dropped, and the poor sucker literally froze on the spot.

The poor darling didn't know what the heck I was asking of him.

Why?

Because the question was a foreign one that did not fit into the known-scenario in the order process that they were accustomed to.

To be fair, though, I realize full well that if you or I traveled overseas to Italy or France, we both might end up mangling their language, too, without a lesson or two under our belts.

Why not just admit the lack of fluency, be open about it, and put our best foot forward?

It all boils down to fear, I guess.

If some of  these Latino immigrants would acknowledge the truth and at least try to make an effort to learn English - and reach out for heaven's sake - perhaps Americans might be more sympathetic to their plight

For example, when I was in Montreal many moons ago, I learned a valuable lesson in that regard.

Although I was taught Parisian French in school (Canada is a bi-lingual country) I was unable to communicate effectively because (1) French Canadians never warmed up to the way France's countrymen conversed in the language, hence, they developed their own style of speaking it (the two factions hate each other, in fact); (2) the Quebecois speak in a regional (some say, guttural) form of French that outsiders are unable to grasp unless they gain access to their innermost social circles.

In sum, the Parisian French we are taught in Canadian Schools is quite formal.

If I conversed in my "King's French", I would appear to be uppity to French Canadians.

In sum, the gaffe on my part, would be a slap in the face.

For that reason, I chose to rent an apartment in the Village in Montreal when I resided there,  to broach that problem.

Consequently, my daily interactions with the locals, and good-faith efforts to communicate in a style and manner they were accustomed to, went a long way to smooth over the waters - and ultimately - earn their respect.

In the end, the Quebecois (usually anti-Anglo) reached out to me, as well.

If there was more of that kind of give-and-take in Los Angeles - and a sincere good-faith intention on the part of both Latinos and English-speaking Americans in that regard - both sides of the language fence would be able to resolve their differences.

The end result?

There would be hands across the borders instead of fists!






 
coompax-digital magazine