|

Roy Cooper: Ignorant of Basic Law

Byoliveridley

No federal law prohibits North Carolina from admitting illegal immigrants to its colleges and universities, officials with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement said today.The statement from federal officials contradicts a letter sent this week by the office of state Attorney General Roy Cooper.The letter from Cooper’s office advised the state Community College System that federal law bars the admission of illegal immigrants to public colleges and universities, even if they pay out-of-state tuition.The letter said that the Department of Homeland Security, of which ICE is a part, was responsible for enforcing the law and offered to ask the department for further clarification of the law.

newsobserver.com | Feds: College OK for illegal immigrants

So, what kind of person randomly makes up U.S Federal laws about undocumented immigrants (illegal, he calls them) and college? Well, the top lawyer of North Carolina’s government, Attorney General Roy Cooper of course! Glad that he was caught out.

The issue? The hordes (350 or so scattered around the University and Community college system) of undocumented immigrants who pay out-of-state tuition and are admitted on merit to attend colleges in North Carolina. Conservatives want college systems to enforce immigration law. What next, have your papers checked every time you fill gas? The claim has often been made that there are a lot of hidden costs that this out of state tuition does not cover and actually, even out of state tuition paying students are being subsidized. No data has been put forward to back up this claim. Note the hactackularness of this tome by the John Pope institute, which makes a lot of conclusions based on their analysis of census data while not actually sharing any of the analysis/results.

Clearly, undocumented immigrants are not overwhelming the system, or even making a dent. So, this is all about demagoguery and I am glad that Governor Easley has overruled his attorney general and come out against colleges acting as immigration police. Life for one of these students is hard enough as it is, getting past the high admissions standards, affording the steep out-of-state tuition, they don’t need to keep looking over their shoulder every time they go to class.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tags:

Similar Posts

  • Police charge pair with 'crime against nature'

    Byoliveridley

    Raleigh police are charging two adults for sodomy in private, although the U.S. Supreme Court appears to have outlawed such charges five years ago.Police on Saturday charged two West Raleigh men with a “crime against nature” for having sex early that morning. Each faces up to two years in prison if convicted of the Class I felony.

    newsobserver.com | Police charge pair with ‘crime against nature’

    When I read the headline, I thought maybe they killed some deer, or emitted too much carbon dioxide, or something. Global warming is a crime against nature, not this!

    If you can stop shaking your head and read the rest of the article, you may conclude that a crime may have been committed, maybe a sexual assault on one man by another, who knows, but to arrest both of them for having sex, ah well, back in the 19th century for you.

    The police/DA may claim that this law is not enforced, so it need not be removed. Our esteemed Southern lawmakers (some of whom may be breaking this “law” anyway) can’t bring themselves to vote to legalize anal sex and oral sex. But why don’t the courts when faced with even one of these prosecutions immediately call the law unconstitutional? I mean, legal precedent points in that direction.

    Oh North Carolina, why?

  • Why Deport Jaskirat Singh Sidhu?

    Byoliveridley

    A federal judge has dismissed applications from the truck driver who caused the deadly Humboldt Broncos bus crash in Saskatchewan and was fighting deportation back to India.

    Source: Federal judge dismisses latest bid to stay in Canada by trucker who caused Humboldt Broncos crash | CBC News

    I find the practice of involuntary displacement (deportation) of Canadian residents for crimes committed to be unjust and cowardly regardless of the crime.

    • Firstly, the concept that the consequences you face for your actions as a resident of Canada depends on your papers is unjust. We would not be deporting a Canadian born citizen for any of their actions. See for example, Tenessa Nykirk. She hit someone who suffered serious injuries while speeding and texting, but she’s not going to deported. Deportation for offences committed is a holdover practice from citizenship laws that were enacted to act as gates especially for “undesirable” immigrants. Yes, I’m aware that Sidhu’s crime violated the Terms and Conditions of his residency, those T&Cs are unjust!
    • Secondly, I find the concept of outsourcing Sidhu’s longer-term rehabilitation and restitution for victims to another country to be cowardly. The problem happened in Canada, the victims were Canadian residents, and the restitution needs to happen here (how one family “forgave” Sidhu). He’s not “somebody else’s problem”.
  • |

    Chinese coal mines in BC: Missing the forest for the trees

    Byoliveridley

    The story of a Chinese company in BC hiring Chinese workers has received a lot of attention. Much of the attention has focused on the company’s decision to game the temporary worker system in order to avoid hiring “Canadian” workers. Many of the objections are made on nationalistic grounds, “OMG, THEY”RE TAKING CANADIAN JOBS”, which then leads down the path of racist anti-Chinese sentiment. This Tyee article (disclaimer: I am a Tyee monthly funder, but obviously have no editorial input!) summarizes the issues involved very well. Recent changes to Canada’s immigration laws make this kind of hiring logical, because it is now okay to pay temporary workers with little/no bargaining power 15% less than you would pay locals. Of course you have to document that there were no qualified locals, but as this particular incident indicates, there’s little/no actual enforcement unless a fuss is made.

    I find temporary worker programs to be problematic because they provide no path to citizenship, no permanence for the people who want it, and cause ugly divisions in the community. If you think there are not enough “workers” in your community, open your borders, let them in and pay well, you’d be surprised.

    I wanted to highlight two obvious issues that to my mind are as important:

    1. Carbon Bomb. It’s a coal mine! How many people in BC, which preens gloriously on its carbon tax, are aware that coal is BC’s Number One export? What is the point of having a carbon tax for consumers when producers get to make money off that carbon for free? Whether the coal is burned in BC, or in China, it causes the same damage. Whether the coal is used to generate power, or to make steel, it puts out the same amount of carbon dioxide. Whether the mine uses Chinese workers or locals, it produces the same climate changing emissions. So, why instead of making coal producers pay the real costs of their product, are we enabling them to evade carbon taxes, royalties, and save even more money by reducing wages? Also, coal mining is not employment intensive, as countless other people have pointed out. So it’s not really about the jobs either. Kevin Washbrook of StopCoal made this point as well in the Tyee article I linked to earlier.
    2. Does this mine have right to be there? The West Moberley First Nation, part of a Treaty 8 band is opposed to the project on its land. That should be the end of the story. The state of Canada has responsibilities as a settler entity to obtain free, prior and informed consent on development from the people it colonized. The US is a bit more honest in this regard as it regards the colonization as a thing of the past and gives its indigenous peoples little/no rights. Canada’s different, the indigenous here have specific standing because of Canada’s existing colonial links and Canadian governments and courts routinely confirm this standing. The BC government is currently negotiating treaties with many First Nations communities including the West Moberley First Nation.

    We’re trying to set up a climate and environment disturbing, cost and tax evading coal mine on land that belongs to someone else using easily exploited temporary workers we can be racist towards.

    coal

  • |

    Indian Workers on Hunger Strike in DC

    Byoliveridley

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDsNzguCzSU

    The video summarizes the issue. Long story short, an American company, Signal International colludes with an Indian contracting company to lure 100s of workers from India with false promises of greencards. The workers proceed to go deep into debt with the contracting company to make this happen. Once in the States, it turns out they’re given H2B guest worker visas (yes, I treat all my guests by making them pay 1000s of bucks a month for sharing a trailer with 25 other people) that are specifically not eligible for green cards except under family quotas. This is bonded labor, American style. No arguments can be made that these workers have it better than in India and they should be grateful.

    I am incredibly proud of these workers for finding the courage to strike and take their protests to DC. The Washington Post seems to have dedicated one measly article worth of coverage.

    There are many reasons for this exploitation. The dehumanization of third world (including Mexican) workers is a contributing factor, so is the broken immigration system that allows excessively restrictive employment contracts. Most importantly, the U.S department of labor exists solely to make the lives of the companies it regulates easier. It has nothing to do with labor any more.

    I am glad they’re protesting for their dignity and broken promises. Wonder what’s stopping the company from firing them for striking, they’re not allowed to strike! That way, they can then notify the aptly named ICE (Immigrations and Customs Enforcement) to have them deported.

  • |

    Let all residents vote in Canada

    Byoliveridley

    BC has municipal elections in October this year and I will be voting for the candidates whose policies, values and voting records on housing affordability, harm reduction, and walk/bike/transit friendliness match mine the closest. I might even have an endorsement or three up my sleeve. This year, I will also be asking Victoria’s municipal election candidates where they stand on letting permanent residents vote in our elections.

    In the 2016 census, nearly 2.5 million people identified as non-citizen residents, out of which two million were permanent residents. The permanent residents live here, work here, play here, pay taxes, grow pensions, volunteer, commit crimes (yes, they’re like any other Canadian) and more, just like those with Canadian citizenship. However, they have no say in who represents them municipally, provincially or federally. I find this unfair, so do many people, including the Vancouver city council, who passed a resolution in 2018 (PDF) calling for the province to approve voting by permanent residents. This globe news article provides a good backgrounder.

    In short, municipalities have run into the conservative buzzsaw that is the state of our (mostly) conservative or liberal provincial governments. This won’t change unless more people speak up.

    The opposition is mainly that non-citizens are not sufficiently “invested” in the country, they’re too “new”. The more paranoid ones talk about divided loyalties, and bring up stories of foreigners being flown in to vote. Perhaps they should try getting a visitor visa to Canada (spoiler alert, difficult).  People who judge other people’s belonging or membership, however, usually have other items on their agenda. Let’s just leave it at that.

    From my perspective, extending the vote is common sense, fair and just, and that’s that.

    Permanent residents? The case is simple. They’re like citizens in all ways, except for voting, and having to renew every five years. If you want to make life difficult, you could ask them to renew voter registration every five years too, but really, you shouldn’t. Are you concerned about “loyalties”? If you are, then you should not be letting the thousands of dual British-Canadian passport holders vote.

    How about residents without the permanent residency paperwork? Don’t see why not? If you’re concerned about timing of residency, put a time limit on the voting registration. There are very few non-permanent residents in Canada, half a million at last count, so, impact is small.

    Undocumented? May be difficult, especially with visibility and its consequences. But, I would support it if we can find a solution that protects people while allowing for verifying identity for voting.

    Of course, giving people a vote does not solve most problems, but that’s not the point. We see conservatives south of the boarder ceaselessly chipping away at the right of non-white people to vote. We need to be be going in the opposite direction on representation.

    So, here are the questions on this issue I intend to ask Victoria’s municipal candidates in 2018:

    1. Do you support efforts to extend voting rights to all residents in Victoria?
    2. If you do, what are you willing/able to do to make this happen at the municipal level at least, then at the provincial level and federal levels?

    A “no” on #1 is going to make it difficult to vote for you. A “yes” on #1 without some coherent plan on #2 means that you need to think about it some more.

    Are you with me? Would you be willing to ask prospective candidates the same questions? Should there be additional questions? Do these questions make sense, or should they be reworked?

    Cross-posted from interrobang

     

  • N&O: Stop Using the word "illegal"

    Byoliveridley

    Colleges await more advice on illegals

    newsobserver.com | Colleges await more advice on illegals

    The N&O does a global search on every “undocumented” in official statements about immigrants and replaces with “ilegals”. Presumably, they are intelligent enough to know what they are doing and are doing this deliberately. Please write to the author of this particular piece, Kristin Collins at kristin.collins@newsobserver.com to let her know that this is disgusting and has to stop. Here’s some typical text…

    I read with increasing dismay, the use of the word “illegals” in your articles to describe people who lack the necessary documentation to live in the United States. A small percentage of their actions can be termed illegal, but they are not “illegal” people. This is the same as saying that every one who drives 36 mph in a 35 mph zone is an illegal. A person may be guilty or charged of illegal acts, that does not make them “illegals”. Note that in the course of a day, an undocumented immigrant may perform  many many legal acts and a so called “legal” American may be breaking the law a dozen times. If the definition of illegal is knowingly breaking a law (whether you get caught or not), all of us are “illegal” in one way or the other.

    I fear that your temptation to use one charged word to describe whole groups of real law abiding, tax paying people is lazy at best, and fear mongering and sensationalistic at worst. The N&O does good investigative work and need not sully its good name by stooping to such demagoguery. Please stop. If you want to use one word, use “undocumenteds”. It is more specific and conveys to readers exactly what illegal act these people are charged with.

5 Comments

  1. Read the AG’s letter. It does not say what the paper reports. Only the paper uses the words illegal immigrants. And that is to sell the paper. The letter does not advise the Colleges that federal law bars admission. It says the courts are unsettled on the matter. This is the paper creating controversy to sell the paper.

    As a researcher you should know to go to the primary source.

  2. I did read the letter and yes, he does not use the magic lines “Illegal must not go to college”. His prose is much more political and lawyerly. But, his letter can’t really be interpreted any other way. He says federal law denies benefits to undocumented immigrants, but somehow weasels in an interpretation that even offering admission at out of state tuition rates is a “benefit”. This is the crux of his misinterpretation.

    Of course, the N&O converted all his undocumenteds into illegals, typical of them. But this is not a case of a paper making a big deal. The letter is pretty damning. If you read the follow up article interviewing Scott Ralls, the community college system president, he does say that they found the letter ambiguous, which it is, and asked for clarification. It is on this clarification that they made their so called decision.

    No one’s being very honest or clear here, but Roy Cooper’s letter, while vague, definitely interprets every statute in a way that bars undocumented immigrants. This was unnecessary and unwarranted under the law.

  3. No, I don’t see anything in the letter that determines whether admission is a benefit or not. It appears carefully drafted not to say that. Yes, it is lawyerly. That is because, well, they are the State’s lawyers.

    Having read the letter I think you must also concede that the AG never refers to any immigrant as “illegal” as you state with such assurance and spite in your original post. It is the paper that uses those words and it is the paper that has created uneccesary confusion.

    Your continued reliance on the N&O to reach conclusions about what advice may or may not have been given in a private meeeting is mystifying. State agencies have a long history of wanting to blame decisions on their lawyers (as do many private entities). But lawyers don’t make the policy decisions.

    This is all a charade. The AG’s letter does not dictate that the Community Colleges do one thing or another. My reading of the letter is that both admitting or not admitting immigrants can pass “judicial scrutiny”, one is more likely to, but it does not say the other wouldn’t. This means no action was dictated by the AG. The AG just gave the Community Colleges a legal risk assessment.

    The Community Colleges likely assessed the non-legal risks, like the mood of their constituents, and chose what they considered to be best for them from a policy perspective and then throw up their hands and claim they were just following the advice of their lawyers. Quite a performance if you ask me.

  4. You’re right. This conversation had me thinking and looking a little more deeply into the Kabuki theater between Scott Ralls, the N&O and Roy Cooper, which is a bit suspicious. And of course, Roy Cooper does not use the word illegals, that’s all the N&O’s wonderful doing. I wrote <a href=”http://www.oliveridley.org/2008/05/17/no-stop-using-the-word-illegal/”a short post about that, really pisses me off!

    No shortage of blame here, Scott Ralls is playing some kind of game here, absolutely right about that. But all Roy Cooper had to say was that he could find no law forbidding undocumented immigrants from college and leave it at that. He half says that in the letter, then half gives Scott Ralls permission to deny admission. He did not have to do that. All the additional bits in the letter provide cover for the community college system to discriminate. He just had to say that there was no legal basis for discrimination and end the letter.

    But, thanks for the comments, definitely had me digging deeper and finding that the Community College administration was no innocent in this matter.

  5. I don’t know if I am right or not. Who knows. But I do think if the N&O had not (as it continues to do) reported that the AG said you can’t let “illegals” in (which he didn’t say) then it would have been harder for the Community Colleges to change their policy.

    I believe the N&O, by sensationalizing a somewhat say-nothing advisory letter, gave cover to the Community College to cave to their local governing boards. Had they just reported what the letter said and not their spin on it I doubt there would have been a change.

    Kabuki dance indeed!

    Oh well, let’s go back to fixing the environment. Thanks for your work.

Comments are closed.