2004 December 17 Friday
ACLU Wants To Delegitimize Immigration Law Enforcement

The American Civil Liberties Union wants to find something illegal about a brief spurt of immigration law enforcement in California that netted 400 illegals.

In June, a small group of Temecula-based Border Patrol agents set off a panic among immigrants by beginning to patrol and arrest people in cities far north of the border, including Corona and Ontario.

The next month, the ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking information about whether the Border Patrol was acting lawfully.

Imagine, if you will, a country that has decayed so far into barbarism that bank robberies are no longer investigated and prosecuted. Then imagine some lower level federal bureaucrats taking it upon themselves to round up some bank robbers and try to stop the robberies. Then imagine some supposed civil rights organization moving to oppose real law enforcement. Absurd, right?

The ACLU has ceased to be an organization that works to protect constitutional rights and became just another left-liberal political activist organization. By this action the ACLU shows that it simply is opposed to immmigration law enforcement. This form of opposition to immigration law enforcement is, in essence, a claim that the government does not have the moral legitimacy to enforce immigration law. I want the government to protect me from illegal immigration and I want the ACLU to stop acting to deny me that protection.

Share |      By Randall Parker at 2004 December 17 03:34 AM  Immigration Politics

John S Bolton said at December 17, 2004 4:18 AM:

What they do makes a weird sort of coherency, if you keep in mind that they want freedom ~for~ aggression; but no bourgeois freedom ~from~ aggression. If they defended the Nazis in Skokie, it would be because the ACLU believed that this would lead to more freedom ~for~ aggression. They identify who they believe is the aggressor, and support him if his getting off will lead to more aggression. Their idea would be: smash the bourgeoisie, whose reality prevents the depraved scholars' otherwise-powerful wishing-faculty from being actualized, through official discretion. Suppression of the government schools as such, would bring this irrationality to a deep quieting.

T. J. Madison said at December 17, 2004 9:04 AM:

All you guys better hope that other nations adopt free immigration policies as well. That way you will be able to flee when the Immigrant Horde makes life here as unbearable as you expect it to.

It's always fun to invoke the principle of universality.

Drew said at December 17, 2004 2:53 PM:

Randall, I agree with you 100%. But why doesn't this conviction of yours count with Australia?

Randall Parker said at December 17, 2004 3:45 PM:


You guys seem to be missing my point about Australia. If a Mexican illegal breaks the law in the United States then that person should be jailed here and made to serve out their full sentence before being deported. That, in fact, is how it works (except that they are not always deported). A foreigner should not be able to skate away from being punished for violating a law in the US just because they are a foreigner.

Also, in the case of Australia: Here is a woman who has built up a huge track record as a criminal. The Australians know she is a criminal. Imagine, in the extreme, she was a serial killer. Would it be fair to another country to deport a serial killer to that country? If the person had been in that other country in the first place all that time then they would have established their serial killing record there and therefore be punishable there. But since they were in a different country they established the record that demonstrated with they were like by doing things in that different country.

But I am also making an aside point about Australia that their legal system is pretty screwed up if this woman was still free to walk the streets after getting sentenced so many times. What if the women had been Australian at birth? Deportation would not have been an option to use to protect the citizens of Australia (unless a certain small island penal colony could be reactivated). Australia ought to have better protections for its citizens.

Randall Parker said at December 17, 2004 3:46 PM:

T.J., See my later post about the Dutch fleeing the Netherlands. But if there is not some filter on the receiving end then what is being fled will just follow to the new destination.

Post a comment
Name (not anon or anonymous):
Email Address:
Remember info?

Web parapundit.com
Go Read More Posts On ParaPundit
Site Traffic Info
The contents of this site are copyright