I just wanted to highlight some of the important news developments that have occurred over the course of the past month as the Senate debated the recently defeated DREAM Act.
First off, the Supreme Court-minus Justice Elana Kagan, who’s recused herself due to conflicts that might arise from her work as the Obama adminstration’s former Solicitor General-has taken up a case that challenges the Legal Arizona Workers Act. Having been implemented on the first day of 2008, and upheld on appeal, the law allows local prosecutors, after a formal, conclusive investigation, to charge any employer who knowingly employs illegal aliens under this statute. If convicted, the employer is subjected to a series of penalties. That employer is also forced to use E-Verify to ensure that all of his or her employees are legally authorized to work there.
This case is crucial to our continuing struggle to end the flow of illegal immigration into the United States. Whereas detaining and deporting illegals at the border is a reactive policy, which does not prevent long term illegal migration and settlement in this country, interior enforcement that focuses on punishing those who profit from illegal immigration is a long term, proactive way of deterring further illegal immigration. Without access to jobs, or the money that those jobs create and which allows illegal immigrants to send remittances back to their home country-one of the largest sources of income for the Mexican government-the number of illegal aliens living in this country will decrease. That will in turn have a multiplier effect, as foreign nationals who were planning on coming this country reconsider their decision based upon the diminished number of job opportunities for them when they arrive in the United States. Regardless of how this case is ultimately decided, the fact that we will soon have a definitive decision governing how some unscrupulous employers in this country contract business is a step forward.
Another story that continues to grab headlines, but which unfortunately has not been connected to the anarchic situation unfolding on our southern border by our hopelessly biased press organs, is the escalating, narco-fueled violence taking place in Mexico. Perhaps nothing illustrates this wave of terror more than the recent milestone marked in Ciudad Juarez, which just recorded its three-thousandth homicide of 2010. To put this horrific number in perspective, consider for a moment that my own city of New York was thought “ungovernable” during the nadir of the Dinkins administration, which saw just over 2,000 homicides committed per annum. Despite the absurd assertions by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, no one living here is convinced that the border is secure, and the news from Juarez merely reinforces what everyone who is not an open borders zealot already knows.
Finally, in yet another example of judicial activism run amok, a federal judge has ruled that the ineffectual and ineffective former chief of ICE in the Bush administration, Julie Myers, can be sued for potentially infringing upon the constitutional rights of illegal aliens who were rounded up in a series of home raids in the city of New Haven, a santuary city. This is yet another demonstration of judicial excess which needs to be corrected. One of the chief reasons that illegal aliens have been allowed to live and thrive in the United States is the continued support they receive from our federal judiciary, whether it comes in the form of allowing illegals to pursue their education on the taxpayer’s dime, or-as in this case-forcing federal immigration enforcement agencies to not do their job. This is one area that needs to be addressed if we are ever to hope for any sustained immigration enforcement in this country.