Federal Debt Crisis: In my latest post on July 31, 2010 below, I noted that Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) had a plan to cut the federal debt:
"To reduce spending in the long term, [Grover] Norquist [of the Americans for Tax reform] recommended a Republican proposal offered by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), who is also a member of the National Commission, that Ryan calls a 'Roadmap for America's Future'.... Liberals would probably be surprised to learn that Republicans actually have ideas for fixing major problems in our country. That is the natural result of believing what the Democrats say about the GOP and only reading the mainstream media or liberal blogs and never watching Fox News."
Well to my surprise, the Washington Post (a long time member of the "mainstream media") actually ran a story about Paul Ryan's "Roadmap for America's Future" (on the front page!) two days later on August 2, 2010! The Post stated that
"[Paul Ryan] is determined to persuade colleagues to get serious about eliminating the national debt, even if it means openly broaching overhauls of Medicare and Social Security. He speaks in apocalyptic terms, saying the debt is 'completely unsustainable' and warning that 'it will crash our economy.' He urges fellow politicians, and voters, to stop pretending that this problem will go away on its own.
He administers his sermons with evangelical zeal. He will go anywhere and talk to anyone who will listen. When he is not writing op-eds and appearing on television, he can often be found speaking to liberal and conservative audiences alike about his 'Roadmap for America's Future,' a plan he says would fix the problem." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/01/AR2010080103518.html
Illegal Immigrants: In my blog post on May 23, 2010 discussing the announcement by the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that his agency might not process illegal immigrants sent to him by Arizona authorities because he feared that the new Arizona immigration law could lead to racial profiling, I expressed my outrage that a federal official would fail to carry out his duty to enforce the laws he swore an oath to enforce. I also noted my view that the Arizona law would not seem to require law enforcement officers in Arizona to do anything unusual for any police officers to do:
"[T]he new Arizona law only requires state law enforcement officers to inquire about immigration status whenever "any lawful stop, detention or arrest [is] made by a law enforcement official" and a "reasonable suspicion exists that the person [stopped] is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States". Even without any statute, it would seem that such an inquiry would be a logical approach for any law enforcement officer to take in any state in the country." http://jaxonnews.blogspot.com/2010/05/dereliction-of-duty.html
Well, on July 30, 2010, Ken Cuccinelli, the Attorney General of Virginia, issued an opinion to a member of the Virginia legislature that agrees with my assessment in May:
"Indeed, it would be most surprising if state and local officers lacked the authority,
where appropriate, to arrest individuals suspected of committing federal crimes such as bank robbery, kidnapping or terrorism. State and local officers are not required to stand idly by and allow such criminals to proceed with impunity. The same holds true with criminal violations of the immigration laws....
The new Arizona law does not purport to grant new powers to law enforcement officers in Arizona; nor does it suggest the absence of authority by police officers in Virginia. The Arizona law expressly leaves the determination of an alien's immigration status to ICE or to a federally authorized law enforcement officer. Virginia law enforcement officers have the authority to make the same inquiries as those contemplated by the new Arizona law. So long as the officers have the requisite level of suspicion to believe that a violation of the law has occurred, the officers may detain and briefly question a person they suspect has committed a federal crime.
Furthermore, the United States Supreme Court has found that so long as the questioning does not prolong a lawful detention, police may ask questions about immigration status. [Footnote on this point cites Muehler v. Mella, 544 U.S. 93 (2005) as the Supreme Court case referenced above].
It also should be noted that under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations,
state and local officers are required to advise foreign nationals of their right to speak with a consular officer when those persons are arrested and held for longer than a short period of time. It is difficult - if not impossible - to effectively provide that advice, mandated by treaty, without making an inquiry into the nationality of a person who is in custody." http://www.oag.state.va.us/OPINIONS/2010opns/10-047-Marshall.pdf
-------------------
Keep reading this blog if you want to stay ahead of events......
No comments:
Post a Comment