Arizona's immingration bill

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:59 am

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/will-bunc ... 45439.html

Basically Arizona passed comprehensive immigration reform. Its called target them and get them the hell out of our state by making it as hard and dangerous to be there as possible. What I love about this debate is how a group of criminals, illegal immigrants, is being painted as the victims of a naziesque extermination campaign. If these were crack dealers, we'd be celebrating enforcement of the law. Instead we are hit with sympathy story after sympathy story about how illegal immigrants taking american jobs can't be sent back to their country because they or their loved ones will suffer due to deportation or loss of free life saving medical care.

"The alternative would be for Arizona to listen to the words of another much-honored American of the 20th Century, who said the nation needed to act in order to "improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society.""

I mean seriously, who are we talking about here? The sex offenders who have to live under bridges? The convicted felons who are screened out of so many employment situations? No, its the ILLEGAL MEXICANS who come into the USA knowing they are breaking the law seeking financial gain and the financial benefits of having their kids educated in our schools and getting their healthcare in our emergency rooms and free clinics.

Maybe later I can actually talk about the bill, the ramifications. I think Arizona is gonna get their pants sued off for racial profiling. Its going to be a disaster. You can't arrest hundreds or thousands of illegal immigrants without the statistics working against you. 990 of every 1000 arrests is going to be mexicans and 99% of the people questioned will be dark skinned because ... wait for it ... people from mexico are nearly exclusively not white.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:37 pm

I wonder if Arizona and other states on the border end up receiving a net benefit from all these illegals or whether it costs them. The conventional wisdom is that they take jobs away from citizens. But on the other hand, everyone else gets to benefit from lower costs. Imagine how much your landscaper would have to charge you to cut your grass if everyone working in that industry was a legal citizen and card-carrying union member. Or the prices on your local restaurant menu if all the busboys and kitchen staff were replaced with union folk. Then again, the illegals don't generally pay taxes, and they consume an enormous amount of government services. Perhaps we should just allow more legal immigration?
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Wed Apr 21, 2010 7:16 pm

I don't think a guy with barely a high school education looking for a job to feed his family cares how much a landscaper costs. Not to say that you don't have a point, but I think your point can only be narrowly applied to the true middle class (those that make a living from their expertise).
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Wed Apr 21, 2010 9:13 pm

Considering that landscapers expect $20-30 bucks an hour per head for work, I would question the conventional wisdom of whether illegals are working cheaper. I had quotes done to do my landscaping that were $60 a week for a basic mow and $130 a week from another service. Its a < 2 hour mow job with a riding mower and a sweeper or bagger.

My dad hired day labor to put in fence posts on my farm they agreed to a price but then demanded an additional $15 an hour per person to finish the job after they got a couple hours in. It was definitely hard labor, but they quite literally said we get paid $15 an hour to do easy work this is too hard and they aren't slaves. 3 of the 4 guys left when we refused the price change so we gave the one guy who did the job very slightly more than originally agreed.

An article not too long ago said 50% of immigrants are not working in low end jobs, but are employed in the $20-30 range.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:54 am

Around my parts, the illegal immigrants, mostly central americans, hang out at the local home depots every day looking for $100 for 8 hours of work. Lately, with the downturn in the housing market and economy in general, it's not uncommon for them to not find work at all. A lot of them have actually been going back to their home countries.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:04 am

They certainly have a hard time finding work, especially with them not being legal laborers.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:52 am

In NY, $100 for 8 hours of work sounds like a deal. These guys thought they were getting a raw deal at $1,200 total for the job.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:53 am

Well sure, they have other suckers they can take money from.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:29 pm

Illegal immigration is a double edged sword. It not only hurts Americans by creating a cheap, illicit workforce that takes the jobs of Americans and reduces the cashflow of a community by sending countless dollars overseas (2/3rds of all American hard currency are outside of the United States), it hurts the places where illegal immigrants come from, who suffer that shortage of an individual clearly willing to work, robbing their family of fathers and community of the workforce they need to actually build a decent society.

For every one that comes to America halfway, with one foot in our door and one foot in another, with the desire to do nothing but pass cash out - damages our communities, our lives, and our nation.

America should welcome immigrants to an extent, but close the door completely when approaching capacity.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:58 pm

These people who come here illegally send an ENORMOUS amount of money back to their family in Mexico or elsewhere. I don't buy the argument for a second that it is hurting their homelands. It's a net transfer of capital from the wealthy world to the poor one.

Illegal immigrations allows most of us to enjoy cheaper goods and services due to their cheap labor. Don't forget also that illegal immigrants consume goods and services as well, which helps local businesses and creates jobs. The only economic cons of illegal immigrations are a) lower skilled workers pushed out of jobs by the illegals, and b) higher municipal and state taxes in order to provide additional government services to illegals. If you simply let them immigrate legally then the need for additional services would largely be offset by the taxes paid by these immigrants.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:39 pm

Immigrants do send a lot of money back home which improves lives there. I don't buy the claim that it robs their nation of people who are willing to work although I will note that the "efficiency" expectancy for a Mexican worker in Mexico is significantly lower than that of an American in America. I read about it back during the globalization of car manufacturing days, I want to say like they expect 23% efficiency out of a Mexican and your average union employee turns in about a 68%. The problem with work in Mexico is more so that there are no companies willing to start businesses there for a variety of reasons. Whether its the bribes they have to pay, lack of police protection / drug violence or stable political climate / PR issues in America.. there are more negatives than positives.

I used to agree that cheap foreign labor increases our standard of living. I am starting to question that wisdom because despite Microsoft paying workers in China $70 bucks a month, we still pay $30-50 for a new Microsoft mouse. Companies are getting rich, but is our standard of living actually going up because of cheaper manufacturing by the time all the tariffs and regulation and shipping is considered? Also consider consumer economy, if immigrants are sending the majority of the money they earn out of the country instead of spending it here, it has an outsized impact.

Lastly... do poor people really pay taxes? Illegal immigrant or otherwise? Legalizing would just give them a right to all the services the poor have access to wouldn't it? I don't see how legalizing them could result in a net positive in terms of taxes... especially payroll / social security. Maybe with healthcare/individual mandate, but again they are poor won't they get the subsidies? Also, consider that states with high immigrant populations typically have sales tax and that rent includes a measure of property taxes ect...
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:08 pm

kiryan wrote:I am starting to question that wisdom because despite Microsoft paying workers in China $70 bucks a month, we still pay $30-50 for a new Microsoft mouse.


Wait... did some of the things I said all those years ago actually get through?
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:11 pm

Corth wrote:These people who come here illegally send an ENORMOUS amount of money back to their family in Mexico or elsewhere. I don't buy the argument for a second that it is hurting their homelands. It's a net transfer of capital from the wealthy world to the poor one.

Illegal immigrations allows most of us to enjoy cheaper goods and services due to their cheap labor. Don't forget also that illegal immigrants consume goods and services as well, which helps local businesses and creates jobs. The only economic cons of illegal immigrations are a) lower skilled workers pushed out of jobs by the illegals, and b) higher municipal and state taxes in order to provide additional government services to illegals. If you simply let them immigrate legally then the need for additional services would largely be offset by the taxes paid by these immigrants.

It hurts their homelands by making them dependent upon an illegal industry, much in the same way that cocaine exportation hurts South American countries.

Sure, selling dope doesn't hurt a family - until something happens to the dealer.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:37 pm

Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:I am starting to question that wisdom because despite Microsoft paying workers in China $70 bucks a month, we still pay $30-50 for a new Microsoft mouse.


Wait... did some of the things I said all those years ago actually get through?


Looks like Kiryan took a page out of your playbook Sarvis. Can't deny it.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:35 pm

Corth wrote:
Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:I am starting to question that wisdom because despite Microsoft paying workers in China $70 bucks a month, we still pay $30-50 for a new Microsoft mouse.


Wait... did some of the things I said all those years ago actually get through?


Looks like Kiryan took a page out of your playbook Sarvis. Can't deny it.

Blind annoyance and sarcasm?

I'm also quite curious. We get our Microsoft mice at around $8.95 per unit. With the lasers and the clicky wheels.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:36 am

The mice in the picture in the article I read looked like the retail packaged ones that go for $30-70.

It is true yoiu can find nice laser mice for $10-20, but not retail where most people have to buy them.

calm down sarvis, I'm just thinking about it. I haven't turned communist yet!
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:37 am

kiryan wrote:The mice in the picture in the article I read looked like the retail packaged ones that go for $30-70.

It is true yoiu can find nice laser mice for $10-20, but not retail where most people have to buy them.

calm down sarvis, I'm just thinking about it. I haven't turned communist yet!

Retail still employs American workers, dontchaknow? We pay about $9 a unit in the bulk packaging that pretty much ships straight from Malaysia to Chicago to here.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:53 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:
kiryan wrote:The mice in the picture in the article I read looked like the retail packaged ones that go for $30-70.

It is true yoiu can find nice laser mice for $10-20, but not retail where most people have to buy them.

calm down sarvis, I'm just thinking about it. I haven't turned communist yet!

Retail still employs American workers, dontchaknow? We pay about $9 a unit in the bulk packaging that pretty much ships straight from Malaysia to Chicago to here.


Then charge $30-$40 per unit. Yay capitalism!
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:14 pm

Only if you buy from people who sell it for that much. Really, that's just your own fault.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:20 pm

MSRP, anyone?
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 4:51 pm

Thank you for your purchase.

Your order number 29139489 for 3 Optical 3 Button Mouse has been received by Woot on 1/26/2010 and your credit card has been charged $7.97.
Your order will typically ship within 5 business days. To check your order status, go to the Your Account tab at www.woot.com, log in and check your order history.

Please review the information above and report any discrepancy immediately to service@woot.com. Make sure your user name and order number are included in all correspondence related to this order.

Here is a link to the discussion of this product on the Woot Community Forums:
http://www.woot.com/Forums/ViewPost.aspx?PostID=3743886

Thanks again for shopping at Woot. Please visit us again at www.woot.com.

-------------

That's me buying 3 optical mice (manufactured by HP) for $7.97 shipped on 1/26/10.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:47 pm

Corth wrote:Thank you for your purchase.

Your order number 29139489 for 3 Optical 3 Button Mouse has been received by Woot on 1/26/2010 and your credit card has been charged $7.97.
Your order will typically ship within 5 business days. To check your order status, go to the Your Account tab at http://www.woot.com, log in and check your order history.

Please review the information above and report any discrepancy immediately to service@woot.com. Make sure your user name and order number are included in all correspondence related to this order.

Here is a link to the discussion of this product on the Woot Community Forums:
http://www.woot.com/Forums/ViewPost.aspx?PostID=3743886

Thanks again for shopping at Woot. Please visit us again at http://www.woot.com.

-------------

That's me buying 3 optical mice (manufactured by HP) for $7.97 shipped on 1/26/10.



Refurbished according to the comments. New it would have cost you $19 apparently: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6826700043
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:53 pm

Yeah I bought 3 refurbished mice for a grand total of $7.97 delivered to my front door. If 2 of them brake and one works I'm still very much ahead of the game. So far they all seem to be working nicely. Point being, thank you foreign labor!
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:05 pm

What does foreign labor have to do with refurbishing? The foreign labor price is the "new" price as best I can tell. There's actually a law which prevents companies from selling a product as new once it has been returned, even if there was nothing wrong with it. I'd credit that law more than the labor itself with saving you money, lest companies just put it in a box and sell it for full price.

Though I'd bet the refurbished price is a "stop-loss" price set very close to the production cost to avoid losing money and/or having to store or dispose of a bunch of crap no one wanted to keep.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:18 pm

As we speak I have 2 latinas cleaning my house for 2 hours. Costs me $65, which comes out to about $16 per hour for each of them. Not so bad considering they have to come to my place. Guessing about 20 minutes of travel from their previous job.

Outside I have 2 hispanic guys extending the fence that goes around my house through the side yard an extra 25 feet or so, and then gating it off on each side.

All I know is that if I was paying americans to do this work.. or, YIKES, paying unionized americans to do it, I would be paying a hella lot more.

So point being, thank you foreign labor!
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:23 pm

Corth wrote:As we speak I have 2 latinas cleaning my house for 2 hours. Costs me $65, which comes out to about $16 per hour for each of them. Not so bad considering they have to come to my place. Guessing about 20 minutes of travel from their previous job.

Outside I have 2 hispanic guys extending the fence that goes around my house through the side yard an extra 25 feet or so, and then gating it off on each side.

All I know is that if I was paying americans to do this work.. or, YIKES, paying unionized americans to do it, I would be paying a hella lot more.

So point being, thank you foreign labor!


Would you? $15/hour is probably more than half the people at my company are making with their college degrees. Hell it took me a year and a half to work up to that as a programmer because the last boss was such a cheapskate.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:34 pm

Thank you for making my argument that too many people go to college.

But beside that, you sit there for 8 hours straight making that hourly rate. Plus there are undoubtedly some benefits. Healthcare, 401k matching, etc. Finally, you are working in buffalo where the cost of living is significantly less than Long Island

These girls have to travel 20 to 45 minutes between jobs. Figure they do 4 jobs a day about 2 hours each, and then another 2 hours of travelling in between. They worked 10 hours and made $260. Comes to $13 an hour each with no benefits at all - and they have to deal with Long Island cost of living. The only advantage they have over the college educated suckers making less than $15 an hour at your company is that they don't have any student loan debt.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:37 pm

Sarvis wrote:Would you? $15/hour is probably more than half the people at my company are making with their college degrees. Hell it took me a year and a half to work up to that as a programmer because the last boss was such a cheapskate.

So learn Spanish and start cleaning bathrooms.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 7:50 pm

Or wait until the new boss took over, realized how much I was actually worth and earn 4 times those ladies while only having to proverbially deal with your shit.

Corth: It may be that I only got 3 hours sleep last night, but I really have no idea what we're talking about anymore. Sorry...
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:00 pm

I'm glad you finally realized how much you are worth! Capitalism FTW!
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:14 pm

Sarvis wrote:Or wait until the new boss took over, realized how much I was actually worth and earn 4 times those ladies while only having to proverbially deal with your shit.

Corth: It may be that I only got 3 hours sleep last night, but I really have no idea what we're talking about anymore. Sorry...

While I'm not familiar with your situation, skilled computer workers are in demand and you could relatively easily have found a new boss on your own.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:18 pm

Damn, did the math wrong... only making about double what Corth's cleaning ladies are.

I don't remember the numbers, but I interviewed at a few places and no one was willing to pay me what I'm getting now. The current boss realized my worth in the quality of my work, not in the average salaries other people get.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Corth » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:26 pm

Hey, that's good for like $65 - $75k per year. Not a bad wage for playing Farmville and surfing Fark.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby Sarvis » Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:37 pm

Oh god no... Farmville sucks. I really don't get the appeal... pretty much all the Facebook games suck.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Arizona's immingration bill

Postby kiryan » Fri Jun 10, 2011 7:25 pm

LOL this is great. For once, maybe we should listen to the UN.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56615.html

Civil rights groups, business interests and the Obama administration contend the state cannot enforce federal immigration

== Obama doesn't want states enforcing immigration law. Duh he needs the illegal votes to keep Democrats in office.

Yet Arizona’s more comprehensive — and controversial — law actually implements international law.

== this is a bit of a stretch, but keep reading

Though Arizona officials seem oblivious to that fact, the World Court — formally the International Court of Justice — has suggested that U.S. law enforcement officials routinely ask people arrested whether they are U.S. citizens as a way to give effect to a treaty the U.S. has been violating.

The treaty — the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations — requires that foreign nationals who get arrested be notified of their right to contact consular officials from their home country.

== there you have it, all AZ is doing is determining the nationality of the people arrested so they can make sure their internationally recognized rights are honored.

The World Court agreed with Mexico, ruling that Washington was in violation of the treaty and had to do more “by means of its own choosing” to comply.

Then-President George W. Bush issued an order to Texas courts, directing them to comply with the Avena ruling. In the Medellin case, however, the Supreme Court held that “while the ICJ’s judgment in Avena creates an international law obligation on the part of the United States, it does not, of its own force, constitute binding federal law that pre-empts state restrictions” on criminal procedure.

It also ruled that Bush could not enforce the international law obligation against the states. Without federal legislation, compliance with international law was left to the states.

== I remember Texas Bush to get stuffed. This is hillarious, the court ruled the feds couldn't require Texas to do anything (at least without legislation).

“In view of the large numbers of foreign nationals living in the United States, these very circumstances suggest that it would be desirable for inquiry routinely to be made of the individual as to his nationality upon his detention, so that the obligations of the Vienna Convention may be complied with. The United States has informed the court that some of its law enforcement authorities routinely ask persons taken into detention whether they are United States citizens. Indeed, were each individual to be told at that time that, should he be a foreign national, he is entitled to ask for his consular post to be contacted, compliance with this requirement under Article 36, paragraph 1 (b), would be greatly enhanced.”

To Mexico and international civil rights organizations, the question is: Can a state only ask about U.S. citizenship to determine an arrestee’s nationality when the state’s motive is to benefit the foreign national?

== very good question. So they only want you to ask about national status when it benefits them, other than that you can't ask!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/56615.html

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests