Results 1 to 10 of 10
South Carolina embraces fascist ruling of banning illegal immigrants
South Carolina Town Moves On Illegal Immigrant Ban
08-12-2010
SUMMERVILLE, SC (AP) — This quiet South Carolina community thousands of miles from the Southwest gave initial approval Wednesday to ban illegal immigrants from living within the town limits.
“The problem is not just in the border states, it’s right here,” Councilman Walter Bailey said shortly before they voted 4-2 to give first approval to the ban, which would also, in most cases, keep illegal immigrants from working in the town about 20 miles from Charleston.
About 100 people gathered in the town hall for the meeting and the 20 or so who addressed the council during 90 minutes of public comments were about evenly divided between supporters and opponents.
Under the ordinance, up for final approval next month, renters would have to prove they are American citizens or in the country legally. A verification form would have to be filed with the town.
Victoria Middleton, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union in South Carolina, warned the council that there are questions about the constitutionality of the ordinance, adding immigration is not a local issue.
“Congress and the Constitution give the federal government the power to enforce immigration,” she warned. She said local communities have spent upward to $1 million in futile efforts to impose such laws.
“I’m offended by the intimidation of the ACLU,” Bailey said later. “If they want to challenge us to a lawsuit, I accept that challenge.”
The immigration debate has moved to the political forefront since Arizona passed a contentious measure that among other provisions instructs police to question whether people are in the country legally when they are enforcing other laws. A federal judge has since blocked that and others parts of the law from being enforced.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, lawmakers in 44 states passed 191 state laws and adopted 128 resolutions on immigration in the first six months of this year. Five were vetoed.
There are numerous local immigration ordinances across the country, too many to track, said Vivek Malhotra, the national advocacy and policy counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Summerville Councilman Mike Dawson suggested the housing and harboring regulations be deleted from the ordinance – a motion that failed for lack of a second.
“A lawsuit is not just a possibility, it’s a certainty,” he said, adding that town insurance probably won’t cover the cost of a constitutional challenge.
Councilman Aaron Brown said it’s the town’s responsibility to provide basic services such as fire and police protection.
“One of the problems with this ordinance is it goes beyond what the town owes you,” he told the audience, adding new businesses won’t want to locate in a town where there is a controversy over immigration.
Councilman Bob Jackson, who supported the ordinance and who owns rental units, said the paperwork required by the proposal is not much more than what rental agents do now to check tenants.
“The illegals entering are hurting everybody, including the people who are waiting to come here legally,” he said.
“This is not a town issue, it’s a federal issue,” said Diane Salazar who described herself as a leader of the local Latino community. “Are you as a town ready for a civil rights lawsuit?”
Bailey, a former state prosecutor, said the ordinance was prompted in part by the Obama administration’s challenge of the new Arizona law that was to have taken effect last month.
“I am frustrated the federal government is doing nothing,” he said. “If we don’t do this we might as well put signs up on every road into town welcoming illegal aliens.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_679782.html
“The illegals entering are hurting everybody, including the people who are waiting to come here legally,” he said.
They always fall back on that argument. If they cared so damn much about people coming in here legally, why not fix the damn system? Moves like this are nothing more than political posturing.
Though I think calling this "fascist" is a bit much don't you?
Last edited by Red Commissar; 14th August 2010 at 05:07.
"fascist" doesn't mean "bad"
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
Fremont, NE also passed a similar law as Arizona's. What a shame.
If people did their research, there are a lot of studies and straight up facts and statistics that disprove a lot of stereotypes on immigrants.
They are not the problem; the system is the problem, the capitalists are the problem.
NO ONE IS ILLEGAL.
Absolutely.
Like the article says, if they go through with passing this, they will have a huge lawsuit on their hands. I think that alone will stop this from being passed.
Not really. This "my race is dominant to yours" line is too close to the mindset of those within the ruling class of Nazi Germany. I believe the term fascist may be too early to use, but it's essentially within a correct line.
Oh wow, my town.
racism is not the same as fascism
'heavens above, how awful it is to live outside the law - one is always expecting what one rightly deserves.'
petronius, the satyricon
Yeah. All the less they are expecting some fall out somewhere to help rally the base. The Republicans are trying to get this senes of urgency in their constituents to come out and vote in November as a part of their little Revolution. In someways it can possibly a repeat of the 1994 Congressional elections if they play their cards right (though I doubt it for some reason).
It's racist, but by itself it is not fascist. I don't like the term being thrown around loosely any more than right-wing nuts throw around "socialist". I'm more inclined to agree with bcbm here.
Good point.
