Massachusetts becomes third state to reject Secure Communities

[BeauJangles]

http://www.wbur.org/2011/06/07/secure-communities-4

BOSTON — The Department of Homeland Security says it will overrule Gov. Deval Patrick on his decision to opt out of a controversial federal immigration program.

An agency official told the Boston Globe that Massachusetts will be required to participate in the Secure Communities program by the year 2013.

The program shares fingerprints of everyone arrested in the state with federal immigration officials.

The program is meant to help deport serious criminals. But Patrick said the state won’t sign up because the database check has led officials to deport many non-criminals.

But Republican state Rep. Richard Bastien said the state is missing out on a valuable law enforcement tool.

Patrick originally said the program was mandatory, but now he said he understands it’s not. Massachusetts is the third state to reject Secure Communities.

I find it ironic that the program is named "Secure Communities," yet it is being jammed down the throats of communities that clearly feel secure without it. Whether or not you think the law is a good idea, I do think that the individual states should be allowed to opt out of it. After all, most of its policies will be enforced by local PD departments.

 

[OCGuy]

States harboring illegals.....wow. I am glad my county does deport criminals. And by that I mean illegal aliens.

 

[woolfe9999]

States harboring illegals.....wow. I am glad my county does deport criminals. And by that I mean illegal aliens.

Point of clarification: it is a crime to cross the border without documentation. It is not a crime to be in the country without documentation. About half the undocumenteds came in with visas then overstayed. This subjects them to civil deportation but is not a crime. I think this is what Patrick meant when he said "non-criminals are being deported." Feel free to disagree with his opinion about the desirability of deporting them as do I, but he is technically correct.

 

[OCGuy]

Point of clarification: it is a crime to cross the border without documentation. It is not a crime to be in the country without documentation. About half the undocumenteds came in with visas then overstayed. This subjects them to civil deportation but is not a crime. I think this is what Patrick meant when he said "non-criminals are being deported." Feel free to disagree with his opinion about the desirability of deporting them as do I, but he is technically correct.

You can be imprisoned for over-staying a visa, because you gave false information to obtain that visa (you said you were going to leave)


Search 8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien



a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VIII/1325

 

[woolfe9999]

You can be imprisoned for over-staying a visa, because you gave false information to obtain that visa (you said you were going to leave)


Search 8 U.S.C. § 1325 : US Code - Section 1325: Improper entry by alien



a) Improper time or place; avoidance of examination or inspection;
misrepresentation and concealment of facts
Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States
at any time or place other than as designated by immigration
officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration
officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United
States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the
willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or
imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent
commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or
imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/8/12/II/VIII/1325

Yes that is true, but that is another way to illegally cross the border. You're just doing it by deceit rather than by stealth. As I said, about half the undocumenteds in this country entered quite legally, with legit visas, but overstayed. They are subject to civil deportation but not criminal prosecution.

 

[wuliheron]

A quick Google search indicates Mass is number 15 on the list for the most illegal aliens and among the top 10 in the country for how expensive it is to live there. How much you wanna bet the governor is attempting to save a failing economy by protecting businesses hiring illegal aliens for cheap labor.

 

[shira]

http://www.wbur.org/2011/06/07/secure-communities-4

BOSTON — The Department of Homeland Security says it will overrule Gov. Deval Patrick on his decision to opt out of a controversial federal immigration program.

An agency official told the Boston Globe that Massachusetts will be required to participate in the Secure Communities program by the year 2013.

The program shares fingerprints of everyone arrested in the state with federal immigration officials.

The program is meant to help deport serious criminals. But Patrick said the state won’t sign up because the database check has led officials to deport many non-criminals.

But Republican state Rep. Richard Bastien said the state is missing out on a valuable law enforcement tool.

Patrick originally said the program was mandatory, but now he said he understands it’s not. Massachusetts is the third state to reject Secure Communities.

I find it ironic that the program is named "Secure Communities," yet it is being jammed down the throats of communities that clearly feel secure without it. Whether or not you think the law is a good idea, I do think that the individual states should be allowed to opt out of it. After all, most of its policies will be enforced by local PD departments.

OP, the point of the article is that Mass is NOT going to be allowed to opt out - it's going to be FORCED to participate. You might want to change the thread's title, since it's completely backward.

 

[BeauJangles]

A quick Google search indicates Mass is number 15 on the list for the most illegal aliens and among the top 10 in the country for how expensive it is to live there. How much you wanna bet the governor is attempting to save a failing economy by protecting businesses hiring illegal aliens for cheap labor.

I think it is a political move by Patrick.

It is terribly unclear whether the Secure Communities law compels states to participate or not. If it does, it requires that compliance by 2013 so Patrick's "rejection" of it might be nothing more than staving it off for a few years. I'm sure part of the reason he's doing this is to appeal to minority voters and curry favor. Knowing a bit about him, though, I believe he does have serious reservations about how this law impacts the rights of citizens. He's publicly stated that he's uncomfortable with the law as currently constituted because it results in the deportation of people with no criminal records and part of his rejection of the law may also be to attempt to force some reform into it.

I would also like to point out that Massachusetts currently is one of the fastest growing economies in the country @ 4.2% in the first quarter, which has been nearly all from the technology and biotechnical industries.

 

[fskimospy]

States harboring illegals.....wow. I am glad my county does deport criminals. And by that I mean illegal aliens.

You're doing them a favor. If you didn't they would be forced to live in Orange County, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

 

[CPA]

http://www.wbur.org/2011/06/07/secure-communities-4



I find it ironic that the program is named "Secure Communities," yet it is being jammed down the throats of communities that clearly feel secure without it. Whether or not you think the law is a good idea, I do think that the individual states should be allowed to opt out of it. After all, most of its policies will be enforced by local PD departments.

I think it's ironic that the governor is claiming it also deports non-criminals when every friggin illegal alien, by definition, is a criminal.