patrick.net

Get your earplugs ready, and prepare to tune out assurances of dire predictions (worse than Brexit, since many countries fund unsustainable levels of economic and social program activity on the backs of dumping exports in the USA).

This is what CHANGE looks like, Obama.

RafiMaas says

https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/retain-store-form-i-9/inspection/inspections

There is the link.

And where is it that employers must inform employees when ICE comes around? I don't see it in your link.

Where is it that employers can't voluntarily comply with ICE's requests earlier if they wish? Don't see it.

Where does it say State Governments can fine US Citizens for not informing employees when they've been notified of an incoming inspection? Not there either.

Also:

Employers will generally receive a written Notice of Inspection at least 3 days before the inspection.

Is Generally the same as "Must" or "Will"?

Sorry, that law doesn't say what you think it says. It simply says the ICE will try to give businesses a few days to gather their records as a part of their general process

Now here's a "must" for you, the same exact page as your link:

When officials arrive to inspect an employer’s Form I-9, the employer must:

Retrieve and reproduce electronically stored Form I-9 and any other documents the officer requests;
Provide the officer with the necessary hardware and software to inspect electronic documents; and
Provide the officer with any existing electronic summary of the information recorded on the employer’s Form I-9.
Employers who refuse or delay an inspection may be in violation of the law.

RafiMaas says

We're does it say they have to voluntarily comply, interesting I didn't see that in there.

Where does it say you can't voluntarily comply?

Can the State forbid you from calling the FBI with a tip that an Arab-speaking man is putting a suitcase you heard go "TICK TOCK" into his car, because that's racial profiling and a violation of his privacy?

The argument is absurd: The State can compel you NOT to cooperate with a Federal Agency exercising it's powers in a domain expressly forbidden to State Governments and reserved to the Federal.

RafiMaas says

All I know is the great state of California is putting pressure on the federal government to make progress in regards to Immigration reform. All these people so concerned over immigration yet don't want to deal with Immigration reform? Why not?

Immigration reform like:

- providing Amnesty to dreamers?
- building a wall?
- ending chain migration and lottery visas?
- enforcing E-Verify?

Isn't it the Democrat party that is holding all this reform up?

RafiMaas says

All I know is the great state of California is putting pressure on the federal government to make progress in regards to Immigration reform. All these people so concerned over immigration yet don't want to deal with Immigration reform? Why not?

I don't want Immigration Reform, I want immigration enforcement. And California is forcing the Federal Government to respond to it's attempt to usurp and/or obstruct this enforcement.

Although I would pop a chubby if Moonbeam or his disciples get arrested on Federal Obstruction Charges.

RafiMaas says

Maybe said that way it makes a bit more sense?

Sure.

But the issue for me is with California telling US Citizens residing in California about how they can or can't cooperate with Federal Agencies.

Brown wants his unlimited immigration into California - but no housing.

Anything else is a declaration of war against California.

Watch the words. This is an evolution that, worse case and not soon, but could end up with CA breaking away from the US.

During any invasion, there is always a side that collaborates.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

bob2356 says

It's pretty clear you don't have a clue what AB 450 actually says if you are throwing out bogus arguments about I9's.

Pretty clear you don't have a clue:

bob2356 says

States have the right to make privacy laws. Period. Other states require anyone including any federal agencies to have a warrant to look at any employment records of anyone, not just immigrants. Even if the employer is willing to do a voluntary hand it over. Is that making federal law? Where is your outrage (crickets chirping again). Feel free to keep on throwing out strawmen and tap dancing around that issue.

The I-9 is an immigration document enforced by ICE, not just an "employment record" that may by the various State Government Agencies.

I don't have a clue?

7285.1. (a) Except as otherwise required by federal law, an employer, or a person acting on behalf of the employer, shall not provide voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to enter any nonpublic areas of a place of labor. This section does not apply if the immigration enforcement agent provides a judicial warrant.

(2) This subdivision shall not apply to I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification forms and other documents for which a Notice of Inspection has been provided to the employer.

Except as otherwise required by federal law. Does not apply to I-9. Seems pretty clear to me.

Were is your outrage about states that require a warrant for any employees records? That obstruction. doesn't bother you? Lots of crickets chirping, no answer in sight.

TwoScoopsPlissken says

It's about the State of California illegally demanding via compulsion that US Citizens/Entities warn others that an ICE inspection is about to take place.

California has NO powers over immigration and NO powers to set regulations for ICE which is a Federal, not State, Entity.

You seem very confused on this point. It's not a regulation for ICE, it's a regulation for employers to give notice to employees their records are being examined. ICE is not hindered any more than any other state that requires a warrant. Still no outrage about the other states obstructing? Why is that?

Patrick says

RafiMaas says

Except as otherwise required by federal law, an employer, or a person acting on behalf of the employer, shall not provide voluntary consent to an immigration enforcement agent to enter any nonpublic areas of a place of labor.

Wow, WTF?

You omitted the last and most important sentence

This section does not apply if the immigration enforcement agent provides a judicial warrant.

So why not just get a warrant?

No Real American wants the federal government doing warrant less anything. If they have probable cause, get a warrant. Otherwise piss straight off

Heraclitusstudent says

Brown wants his unlimited immigration into California - but no housing.

Anything else is a declaration of war against California.

Watch the words. This is an evolution that, worse case and not soon, but could end up with CA breaking away from the US.

What happens to the water CA gets from the Colorado River if they decide to break away from the US? I think succession is a non-starter out the gate because of this. But I admit I don't fully understand the water issues out there. My guess is agriculture dries up without that source of water, literally in SoCal.

I know it gets thrown about that CA is one of the states that needs the least from the federal government. But as a state, it probably can't function at today's levels without an entire regions watershed helping feed the AG business and supply a good chunk of the drinking water. CA is technically a state that is the most dependent on others (other states and feds) if you really think about it.

Guys, relax with the personal attacks. Thanks.

Bah, can’t even refer to the quality of someone else’s argument? Didn’t attack the user, just their false statements.

CA is not going anywhere and not breaking into anything.

errc says

So why not just get a warrant?

I agree that it's easy enough to do, but CA will just fabricate another reason not to cooperate.

RafiMaas says

What could, maybe should happen in CA is breaking into 2 or 3 states.

I don't think we should let any state break apart until at least 2 New England States get consolidated.

zzyzzx says

RafiMaas says

What could, maybe should happen in CA is breaking into 2 or 3 states.

I don't think we should let any state break apart until at least 2 New England States get consolidated.

Why is that?

zzyzzx says

errc says

So why not just get a warrant?

I agree that it's easy enough to do, but CA will just fabricate another reason not to cooperate.

So if it’s easy enough to simply get a warrant, why all the harping on California?

Shouldn’t the ire be directed at ICE for wasting resources and not doing their job?

RafiMaas says

Although off topic just wanted to share more about CA water

It's off topic, but it's going to be an ongoing issue in CA. Everyone needs water. I don't understand all the underlying issues, but unless there's an alternative water source, or more storage, not sure how fresh water can keep up with the population growth in CA. Mainly SoCal as you mentioned, but as one state, everyone is going to have to deal with it.

Even if CA isn't one of the fast growing states, the neighbors that need the same water are. Nevada and Arizona are growing and so is their CO river water usage would be my guess (not sure if UT relies on the Colorado, but they quickly growing too). Somethings got to give. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/economy/2018/01/15/fastest-growing-and-shrinking-states-closer-look/1019429001/

WookieMan says

It's off topic, but it's going to be an ongoing issue in CA. Everyone needs water. I don't understand all the underlying issues, but unless there's an alternative water source, or more storage, not sure how fresh water can keep up with the population growth in CA. Mainly SoCal as you mentioned, but as one state, everyone is going to have to deal with it.

I know little about CA Water Issues, but apparently there are years when man made lakes and water areas are actually overfilled, but I heard the Libbies dump it out to sea instead of holding onto to it for future use.

Also I heard there really hasn't been any new water supply areas created in something like 50 years, even though that 1950's governor's water plan called for double the water management areas CA has now, if/when the population reached today's level of population.

Just shit I heard, not very familiar with the whole thing.

It's quoting a movie, and the insults are directed towards your argument, not you.

RafiMaas says

Unfortunately, CA is looking at it as a privacy issue. One can cry and scream all they want but that doesn't change how this will be fought in court.

No, California is desperately trying to obstruct the Federal Government from enforcing the law and trying to find an excuse to hang their hat on.

That is why Moonbeam and the Gathering of Hippie-cum-Yuppies (aka CA Legislature) are passing all these laws now.

RafiMaas says

Biggest load of bullshit, my argument is me and I say 'you' not 'your argument'. The original is down and I deleted my comment so done and done.

"what you have just said" = your argument
"at no point your rambling, incoherent response..." = referring to the argument
"we are all dumber for having listened to it" = argument was called dumb
"I award you no points" = your argument stank
"and may god have mercy on your soul" = not an insult,

I actually parsed it out to try to be fair when I approved it.

Democrats, 2010: "Only the Federal Government can make immigration law, not the States. Therefore, as President, I've instructed Eric Place Holder to initiate a Lawsuit against Arizona requiring companies to regularly cooperate with the DHS/ICE."
Democrats, 2017: "Not Only the Federal Government can make immigration law. Therefore, as Governor Moonbeam, I intend to enforce this mirror image law of Arizona's law that forbids companies from voluntary cooperation with DHS/ICE."

Patrick says

whose laws and policies restrict local police and jailers from taking part in federal immigration enforcement.

The fuck!? I thought California was trying to stop feds from enforcing immigration. Apparently feds want us to do their job, fuck off.

Satoshi_Nakamoto says

My mom had lots of brothers and a sister in the NorCal Yuba City area - they worked in the fields as pickers when they were young. Gave them a great work ethic most are multi or multi-multi millionaires now.

Funny story from one of my uncles: I think it was the 60s but some demoncrat politico took a tour through their area North of Sacramento and saw all the migrant farm workers (legal back then) squatting down picking strawberries. So he got a law (maybe regulation) passed that said they must be given long handled tools (I'm paraphrasing like crazy) so that they don't have to squat down like that when they work. Shortly after my uncle drove through and saw all the pickers still squatting down picking strawberries with handles sticking up several feet into the air. "You have to get down low to pick strawberries". The picture in my mind back then was sort of like a garden hoe.

No. please stay, I beg you. Without illegals, nothing ever got done in this country... The Polio Vaccine, Hoover Dam, Apollo Program, Microcomputer Revolution, it was all done thanks to Holy Illegals and not the evil conniving Jew Male White.

Oh yeah? My Brother In Law self deported because Obama lied to the Latinos in 2008 and promised to do something with illegal immigrants when he got elected.
By 2010, my BIL was left without a Drivers License in Florida because at that time the State of Florida refused license to illegals.
They wanted him to work in the flooring trade that was OK, he was supposed to undercut the white workers. But I taught him so well he was a high demand expert PreMidona that would touch a job for less than scale and demanded extra for every extra. But had he been caught driving W/O a lisence he would have been sent to Chrome Detention and his Van and tools comfiscated. He just self deported rather than be burdon any of his Family that lives in America legally.

So these Mexicans are doing the sensible honorable thing.
If they are lucky as Louis was. He wasn't the only one that self deported. He was one of hundreds of thousands of Peruvians that returned from America over the last decade. They brought their desire for success and upward mobility back with them. Bless their American hearts. They have built the communities and boroughs outside of Lima into bustling enclaves with excellent standard living, employment and local economies. In 2001 when first went to Lima my MIL house was nestled in between shanties, shacks and leantoos it was a dreary depressing squalid sight. My MIL was living modern and had a decent standard. But her neighbors were in a deplorable state. Destitute and broke. I was glad to leave it was such a sad sight. By 2010 I saw first hand many changes, there was 60% improvement many of those makeshift houses were starting to take shape with real brick walls and concrete floors. I saw video over Christmas my MIL street now looks like a street in Queens NY or something.

I think all of those Peruvians that came to America and then self deported or were deported. Did more for their country by coming back, I couldn't be more proud of what they accomplished.

Logical question is, why Sessions/Trump does not make E-verify mandatory if they are so against illegal immigration? Perhaps what they do is just a smoke screen or illusion of taking action?

drB6 says

Logical question is, why Sessions/Trump does not make E-verify mandatory if they are so against illegal immigration? Perhaps what they do is just a smoke screen or illusion of taking action?

Chum for the retards, obviously

Texas State ban on "Sanctuary Cities" upheld, Federal Court Rules.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/13/us/texas-immigration-law-sb4.html

Unlike the State-Federal relationship, there is nothing to prevent State Legislatures from forbidding cities and counties to implement "no cooperation" policies.

The only part that was struck down was a ban on Sheriffs endorsing Sanctuary Cities as policies.

drB6 says

Logical question is, why Sessions/Trump does not make E-verify mandatory if they are so against illegal immigration? Perhaps what they do is just a smoke screen or illusion of taking action?

Yes, I do worry about that. If they are serious, E-verify should certainly be mandatory, along with jail time for the employers of illegals.

So the possibility remains that the Trump administration is not actually serious about ending illegal immigrantion. Please forward this comment to members of the Trump administration. Hey, you never know, there's a slim chance it will help.

If E-verify was implemented along with other measures to fix illegal immigration the elites ability to divide and control us would be greatly diminished. When do politicians ever end things that give them more power, hope I'm wrong about being pessimistic about it.

someone else says

So the possibility remains that the Trump administration is not actually serious about ending illegal immigrantion. Please forward this comment to members of the Trump administration. Hey, you never know, there's a slim chance it will help.

Wall is also somewhat idiotic - it is more of a symbol to make Trump voters happy. It might work for densely populated areas where one jumps over the border and then easily blends into surrounding population, but for more remote areas drones in air 24x7 for a fraction of price of a wall would be more efficient. Say, TX Big Bend area or AZ desert.

If solutions can be decoupled from ideology, they usually are rather simple, efficient, and cost relatively little. Unfortunately, if Trump comes on TV and with grand posturing declares that he will build a 100-ft high, 10000 mi long wall, and Mexicans will pay for it while liberals will hate it, some of his electorate will wet their pants in happiness. Simple "make E-verify mandatory" might not get him as many votes and might not energize his base, and will cause large fraction of business to hate him.

drB6 says

for more remote areas drones in air 24x7 for a fraction of price of a wall would be more efficient. Say, TX Big Bend area or AZ desert

For more remote areas, a minefield will work better and cheaper.