U.S. SUPREME COURT - Case About Citizenship

"A case about citizenship draws laughter and lively banter at the Supreme Court" PBS NewsHour 4/28/2017

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  The U.S. Supreme Court's final case this term was expected to be a highly technical argument on immigration law, but it wound up pulling back the curtain a bit on the justices' personalities and how they interact.  John Yang takes a closer look with Robert Barnes of The Washington Post.

AMERICA - Anti-Government Sovereign Citizens

These idiots actually think you can have a society (or a nation) without a social contract, like federal or state constitutions.  NO CITIZEN is 'sovereign' unless he/she lives on an island by themselves.  More from kooks of the world.

Vegas arrests cast light on anti-government ‘sovereign citizens’ movement" by Erin McClam, NBC News 8/23/2013

A Las Vegas couple who plotted to kidnap and kill police officers are part of a growing movement whose adherents believe they aren’t subject to laws and follow a complex theory about the secret enslavement of American citizens, authorities say.

The couple spent hundreds of hours developing a plot to attract attention to the movement, a cause known as “sovereign citizens,” which holds that police do not have legitimate power, authorities said.

The two shopped for guns, found a vacant house and rigged it to bind captives to cross beams during interrogation, and they planned to subject officers to their form of a trial for civil rights violations, authorities said.

Authorities have linked the “sovereign citizens” movement to the killing of police officers in the past.  After two deputies in Louisiana were killed in a shootout last year, police said some of the seven people arrested had ties to the movement.

And three years ago in Arkansas, a father-son team of adherents to the movement killed two police officers before they themselves were killed in a separate gun battle with authorities.

In Las Vegas, an undercover officer was with the couple and documented their plans, police told reporters Thursday.  Las Vegas police Lt. James Seebock characterized it as a domestic terrorism plot.

Arrested were David Allen Brutsche, 42, an ex-convict child sex offender from California, and Devon Campbell Newman, 67, police said.  They were charged with attempted murder.

Brutsche trained by posing as a cop and putting a gun to Newman’s head to take her into custody, according to a police report.  They planned to capture police by following their cars and seizing them when the officers got out to make a traffic stop, police said.

The FBI, in a public alert about the “sovereign citizens” movement in 2010, said that adherents don’t believe they have to answer to government authority.  They set up sham courts and clog the real justice system with frivolous lawsuits, the FBI said.

The bureau said that the movement should not be confused with domestic militias:  While “sovereign citizens” followers often use illegal weapons, guns are secondary to their anti-government and anti-tax beliefs.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks extremist groups, says that the movement has grown since the late 2000s but says it can’t know how many believers there are, in part because the movement has no central leadership.

“Sovereign citizens” trace alternate versions of American history, the center says.

Some believe that the American government secretly replaced the system designed by the founding fathers with a version of maritime law and enslaved citizens, and that judges around the country are in on the secret.

Some also believe that the government, at the birth of each child in the United States, sets up a corporate shell account and assigns the rights of the child to the account-holders, the center says.

By filing frivolous lawsuits, “sovereign citizens” adherents believe they can free themselves from the corporate masters and access the money in their shell accounts, the center says.

SUPREME COURT - Arizona's Proof of Citizenship Unconstitutional

Arizona's Anti-Immigrant-Phobia looses again, in 7-to-2 Supreme Court decision.

Note the decision makes Arizona's law unconstitutional because the 'proof of citizenship' is specified in Federal Law and a state cannot require more proof than that.

"Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona's Proof-of-Citizenship Voter Requirement" PBS Newshour 6/17/2013

Excerpt

SUMMARY:  It is unconstitutional to make voters prove their U.S. citizenship to be able to register to vote.  The Supreme Court made that reversal to Arizona law in a 7-2 decision.  Marcia Coyle of the National Law Journal breaks down the details of that ruling with Judy Woodruff.

IMMIGRATION - One View

"So you want to be a citizen" by Mary Pitt, SmirkingChimp

Quotes that follow are from Mary's "Aunt Tildie"

As we sat and stirred our tea, she began again, more quietly. "You know, we have always taken great pride in our nation and our family's service to it, as patriotic as can be, and we revere our founders and the vision they had which was responsible for their creation of a free country, one of law and order, in which we could all work together for the common good. I lost a husband in World War I and a fiancée in the Spanish flu which followed after. Your own brothers and others of my nephews served in World War II, some perished, and others came home with terrible wounds and mental problems, but none of us, including them, ever questioned the rightness of their sacrifice.

"That's what it means to be a citizen of this great country, to love it enough to sacrifice everything for its continuation. We have seen many immigrants from many nations come to our shores. The Africans, of course, had no choice in the matter, being kidnapped and brought in as slaves. but they became as good citizens as any. So did the Irish in fleeing the potato famine, the Jews fleeing persecution in Europe, and all the rest who dreamed for years of a life of freedom and opportunity. They all suffered prejudice and poverty until they learned our language and adapted to the American way of life.

"They were all different, but they had one thing in common. They knocked on the door, so to speak, made application to immigrate and they waited their turn for admission. They filed their papers and were processed according to our laws and, once here, they worked hard at learning our language and our way of doing things until now, when they are part of our common culture and our destiny. This is also true of those of Mexican ancestry whose ancestors were either here at the time of the founding or legally migrated later.

"But these people have broken down our back door and come into our home, taken the food from our children, stolen our jobs, our schools, and our health care, and now they insist that we put their name on the title to the house! It just is not right!"

"We don't need to round them up and ship them back! We can enforce the law against hiring them. We can forbid the free medical care, the free education for their children so that they will know that they have to go home. We can set a date, three years, five years, while we secure the border, that they have to go home. Have offices ready in Mexico to issue secure identity cards like the ones some states use for food stamps, a swipe card with a secret PIN number. They will have to go back to get the card and then we can keep track of them and know where they are."

"Well, they don't seem to want to pay their dues for citizenship but think they only have to get here and then, perhaps pay for the privilege," I suggested.

"Pay their dues! I like that expression!" she chortled, "Previous immigrants paid their dues, for sure. Long before they came here, they applied for visas and then they waited, sometimes for years. During that time, they studied and they planned. They knew that they must know some English and so they studied; they read and talked to people who had been here; they considered which part of this great land would suit them better for climate and have work that they knew how to do. They didn't just throw a pack on their back and sneak across the border in the middle of the night to come here and just take whatever they want!

I suggest you read the whole article, Aunt Tildie's opinion.

As for me, well, I cannot quite decide on this issue.

I tend to agree with Aunt Tildie. Illegal immigrants are just that, illegal. They have in fact broken the law. On these grounds, should they be excused just because they been here for years and not been caught? No. They should not be awarded just because America has been lax in enforcement of immigration law.

On the other hand, I am well aware that the business community is very dependant on immigrant labor, legal or illegal. That is just the facts as they stand. They are filling jobs that companies (and individuals) cannot find American workers for the same low labor cost. If they had to hire American workers for the same jobs, they would have to pay more and pass that increase on to customers. But again, is this a reason to ignore immigration law?

Thorny issue. We each have to decide.