115
Judge Strikes Down Hazleton's Illegal Immigrant Law : Swingers Discussion 834651011
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsJudge Strikes Down Hazleton's Illegal Immigrant Law
TOPIC: Judge Strikes Down Hazleton's Illegal Immigrant Law
GoTo Page: 1 2 3
Start   11 to 20 of 27   End
User Details are only visible to members.
I don't see how someone who isn't an American Citizen and isn't under the protection of our constitution ...can have their constitutional rights violated.

Bridgeport PA
 
 
Username hidden
(12773 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
December

From I-9 instruction, form expiring 3/2007:

"Section 2 - Employer. For the purpose of completing thisform, the term "employer" includes those recruiters and referrers for afee who are agricultural associations, agricultural employers or farmlabor contractors..............

Employers must complete Section 2 by examining evidence ofidentity and .................

Employers must sign and date the certification. Employees mustpresent original documents.....

Employers may, but are not required to,photocopy the document(s) presented. These photocopies may onlybe used for the verification process and must be retained with the I-9.However, employers are still responsible for completing the I-9."

Notice last para, may but not required to photocopy the documents. It's easier to photocopy than write down all the info to be obtained which I have deleted from above for brevity.

My employee files retain copies of these documents with the I-9 in the employee file and will remain so.

St Petersburg FL
 
 
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
December

"Regarding Stpete comments on Form I-9: This form is not used for proof of citizenship; it is only proof of your eligibility to work. In this country, you need not be a citizen to be eligible to work. The rest of the comments are on target. "

I never said the I-9 is used as proof of citizenship! What I said is that the completed I-9 lists various documents to be collected by the potential employer such as drivers license, ss card, birth certificate, passport, etc. There are 3 columns and the form instruction tell you how many of the documents from each list are required to be collected.

"Let me take the I-9 further. Until recently, copies of the documents used to complete an I-9 needed to be on file. That is no longer required due to the stolen identification crisis this country is experiencing. "

As an manager required to collect this information for my company I have received nothing from any government authority that currently states that copies of documents to support the I-9 is not required to be kept on file. But I will definitely check into to this and report back my findings.

In addition, the I-9 is to be completed on all employees not just aliens.

From a human resources page (just goggle Form I-9):

"I-9 Form

Filling out an I-9 form is one of the finals steps to hiring a new employee. The purpose of an I-9 form is to verify that an employee is eligible to work in the United States. The United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service requires that the I-9 form be completed within the employee’s first three days of work. Notice regarding expiration of control number on Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number on the current Form I-9 expired March 31, 2007. USCIS is working on issuing a Form I-9 with an updated control number. This expiration does not affect employer's requirements to comply with employment eligibility verification responsibilities, and employers should continue to use this current version of the Form I-9 until an updated form is posted."

There are other articles stating that the I-9 has or is moving to electronic and employers can connect with homeland security for additional verification of employement status. But these are paid services from 3rd parties.

As a manager fulfilling employment verification for my company I have also signed up at the social security website to verify every employees ss number which is a free service to employers. You enter the employee name and social security number and the site reports back that it is a correct or incorrect match of name and number. In addition it simply says correct or incorrect even wipes out the name and number entered.

End result, that form I-9 is in my employee records along with a copy of the documents received as verification (until I find definitively that I should destroy documents). Since I was in the military, I long ago memorized my ss # and never carried a card (in fact misplaced it). Roughly 10 years ago I had to get social security to send me another card....why? To complete form I-9 for employment.

St Petersburg FL
 
 
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Let me take the I-9 further. Until recently, copies of the documents used to complete an I-9 needed to be on file. That is no longer required due to the stolen identification crisis this country is experiencing.

Fairfield CA
 
 
Username hidden
(575 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Regarding Stpete comments on Form I-9: This form is not used for proof of citizenship; it is only proof of your eligibility to work. In this country, you need not be a citizen to be eligible to work. The rest of the comments are on target.

Fairfield CA
 
 
Username hidden
(575 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
ok time for a CPA to clear this up:

W-9 collected from a corporation, self-employeed persons or other business entities for the purposes of "backup withholding" not an employee. Corporations x the box that they are "exempt" from "backup withholding". If the entity is not exempt (ie other than a corporation) the form is used to withhold just like taxes withheld from an employee for all renumeration received.

For employees:

Before they can collect a paycheck they complete the following or don't go on the payroll:

Form I-9 which lists 3 columns of "acceptable" identification of US citizenship. Most of the time that consists of thier social security card and drivers license (of which a copy is made and placed in thier employee file). This is the only document for citizenship.

Form W-4 to claim the number of personal exemptions they are claiming for purposes of tax withholding.

That's all that's requested and filed. Without the I-9 and W-4 no worky no pay. The copy of the SS card and drivers license supports the I-9

St Petersburg FL
 
 
Username hidden
(989 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Also law enforcement officers do not have to have probable cause to stop you. Only the standard of "reasonable suspicion" has to be met.

Minden NV
 
 
Username hidden
(4041 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Sorry Angel,

Wrong again. In 2004 Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Nev., Humboldt Cty. the Supreme Court ruled that a state requiring individuals to identify themselves when asked during investigative stop does not violate their rights.

Minden NV
 
 
Username hidden
(4041 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Sorry Angel,

You are the one not understanding. I know what uniform rule states, but I am wondering if you truly understand it's application; it seems you do not. If you read the hundred's of different case law concerning the the "uniform rule" you will find it does NOT prevent what the community of Hazelton has done. The "uniform rule" addressing that immigration is the responsibility of congress means a state cannot arbitarily make laws without FIRST reviewing and meeting the standards already set forth by congress to all 50 states. Hazelton did NOTHING to interfer with the authority of Congress or the ferderal laws already in place. Arguing about Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution is a mute point and has NOTHING to do with the city of Hazelton.

Being well read does not mean you know what you are talking about or understanding the application of what you are reading. Again, IMO your interpretation is wrong and I will wait to see what happens as this case works it's way to the Supreme Court.

Minden NV
 
 
Username hidden
(4041 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
IMO, your reading into something that is not there. 28 U.S.C. § 1251 has NOTHING to do with local or state governments making laws that SUPPORT federal statue. It has to do with what part of government; federal, state, municipality etc. has ORIGINAL authority to write and interpret immigration laws that with apply across all 50 states. If your theory that states, cities etc., have no dog in this fight (no, I am not referring to Michael Vick - lol - yet), then the same thing would apply to federal laws concerning racketeering, interstate commerce, education, etc. Yet, states do supplement those laws as well. As long as a state or lower government does not write a law that IGNORES, REJECTS or INTERFERS with federal guidelines or enforcement they are in their right to make additions or to amplify existing law federal or state.

Even though professionally, I believe your are reading into the statue look at KEY words in the statue. "(b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of:". First, the statue keeps referring to the Supreme Court. IMO, that is where this case will end up and if I were a betting man I will bet that the government of Hazelton will be supported by the Supreme Court. Second, the original or final authority in ALL criminals matters is the Supreme Court. (yes - under law illegal immigration is a criminal matter, even though not enforced like one). Third, the Supreme Court (i.e., Federal Government) has original authority BUT NOT exclusive authority. Hazelton did not make contrary or interfering with federal immigration laws, they made ordinances that attack immigration from the peripheral, namely businesses. Fourth; if I am understanding you correctly 28 U.S.C. § 1251 would make ALL current immigration laws obsolete since they were written by the Congress and NOT the Supreme Court. Again the statue refers to which COURT has jurisdiction NOT who can or can not enforce the laws at the street level nor a state or municipalities right to legislate laws that SUPPORT federal standards. It is much the same on military or federal reservations. In many cases, Bases, Posts, Naval ports or other federal lands do not have one jurisdiction. Prior to closing McClellan AFB in Sacramento is a prefect example. The base had several jurisdictions i.e., exclusive, concurrent, reciprocal etc. However, there was only one enforcement agency, the Air Force Security Police Base Law Enforcement Unit. However, depending on where on base you were arrested or ticketed the "original jurisdiction" for your hearing or prosecution could either be the base commander, a federal magistrate, the county prosecutor, or the city prosecutor.

It will be interesting as the city IMMEDIATELY appealed. It was not automatic as previously stated. I guess we won't know for sure until the appellate court and most likely the Supreme Court hears this case. However, if I were a betting man I would put my money on Hazelton and I am confident enough to let it ride.

Minden NV
 
 
Username hidden
(4041 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3
Start   11 to 20 of 27   End
TOPIC: Judge Strikes Down Hazleton's Illegal Immigrant Law