July 26, 2007

Fred! & the Hazelton Decision

Fred Thompson is the first non-Presidential candidate with an exploratory committee to comment on the Hazelton decision.

Let’s be clear about what’s going on here. No matter what some groups may be trying to do to muddy the water and portray Hazleton’s law as something playing to an uglier agenda, this law is not about legal immigration. This law is about dealing with the illegal immigration problem in Hazleton. The town’s mayor and city officials made this clear from the beginning, and it seems like they took a common sense approach.

Our constitutional system allows cities to take reasonable steps to protect their citizens. When the federal government is unwilling to enforce immigration laws effectively, then cities need to be able to act, and take reasonable steps to secure their citizens from the social, financial, and criminal costs of illegal immigration.

No doubt, this ruling will be appealed. And it should be.


The decision sets up the situation where a city or state wants a law enforced but federal law prohibits it, leaving it to the federal government, who don't want to enforce it.

Immigration Posted by AlexC at July 26, 2007 6:23 PM

An interesting exercise in the 10th Amendment, if nothing else.

Sadly, it'll be years before it gets in front of the Supremes, where Justice Roberts SHOULD stick to his stare decisis (sp?) philosophy.

Posted by: TrekMedic251 at July 26, 2007 10:13 PM

Here we go again...

I don't think the Hazleton law is a good idea. And I think it is a bad case for enforcement types to "get behind."

Let me, humbly, suggest how your side should proceed (you're welcome).

Those seeking stricter enforcement should "Know thy enemy" and should champion legislation and tactics that meet their goals and arouse the least opposition and suspicion from those who see it the other way. Like President Bush goes too far toward praising Islam so that he is difficult to attack as being anti-Muslim, I would suggest that y'all are very cautious on two fronts.

First, you should bend over backwards to demonstrate that you are not racist and would accept no law that interferes with legal immigrants and Hispanic citizens.

Second, you should assure the business community (and its toadies like me) that you do not want to disrupt the economy nor place onerous regulations on business.

You should find laws and tactics that support your goals and are good politics. Instead, the "enforcers" I know immediately hop on any proposal that they feel will harm illegal immigrants. Let's pardon the border guards who misbehaved (because they were shooting at an illegal); let's protest the pizza parlor that accepts Pesos ('cause that would be a convenience to illegals); let's all get behind the Hazleton law ('cause then illegals won't have any place to live or work).

You cover the Pennsylvania beat, ac, and if I am missing subtleties in the Hazleton law, I look forward to elucidation. But you're asking every landlord and employer to be an INS agent. How can you be sure whom you're renting the basement to? I don't want to be fined, I better not rent to any Latinos. It seems to punish employers and landlords for something that is not their problem.

Posted by: jk at July 27, 2007 10:44 AM | What do you think? [2]