Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
Mexico urges US court to block part of Arizona law
The Mexican government has urged a U.S. court to stop Arizona from enforcing a section of the state's 2010 immigration law that prohibits the harboring of illegal immigrants.
Lawyers representing Mexico asked the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a filing Wednesday to uphold a lower-court ruling that blocked police from enforcing the ban. Mexico argued the ban harms diplomatic relations between the United States, undermines the U.S.'s ability to speak to a foreign country with one voice and encourages the marginalization of Mexicans and people who appear to be from Latin America.
"Mexico cannot conduct effective negotiations with the United States when the foreign policy decisions of the federal governments are undermined by the individual policies of individual states," lawyers for the Mexican government said in a friend-of-the-court brief.
The harboring ban was in effect from late July 2010 until U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked its enforcement on Sept. 5. Two weeks before Bolton shelved the ban, she said during a hearing that she knew of no arrests that were made under the provision.
The prohibition has been overshadowed by other parts of the law, including a requirement that went into effect on Sept. 18 that officers, while enforcing other laws, question the immigration status of those suspected of being in the country illegally.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the questioning requirement earlier this year, but also struck down other sections of the law, such as a requirement that immigrants obtain or carry immigration registration papers. The nation's highest court didn't consider the harboring ban.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, who signed the measure known as SB1070 into law and serves as the statute's chief defender, has asked the appeals court to reverse Bolton's ruling on the harboring ban.
Brewer spokesman Matt Benson said Arizona's harboring ban mirrored federal law and that Mexico was interfering with a matter in U.S. courts.
"Mexico's own immigration laws are significantly more heavy-handed than anything imposed as a result of SB1070. Does the Mexican government believe the nearly identical U.S. federal law harms diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Mexico?" he said.
This wasn't the first time a foreign government has chimed in during disputes over the immigration law.
In 2010, Mexico urged the courts to declare the law unconstitutional, and 10 other Latin American countries had joined in expressing their opposition to the law.
Brewer had said the foreign governments were meddling in an internal legal dispute between the United States and one of its states.
No other countries have joined in Mexico's latest friend-of-court brief.
Article
The Hypocrisy that is Mexico's Immigration Laws
Mexico's Immigration Laws Are Draconian Even by the Standards of Arizona's New Immigration Law
The hypocrisy of President Calderon's remarks, and the abundance of hubris to do so in front of the U.S. Congress and the President of the U.S., while completely disregarding the way his own country treats immigrants along Mexico's southern border.
Indeed, Mexico has its own problems with illegal immigration, however unlike the U.S. it does not have nor does it need legions of its own citizens protesting the federal government to stem the tide of illegals entering their country. You see, the immigration laws in Mexico are very different from those of the U.S. and Arizona.
To legally immigrate to Mexico you must first demonstrate that you speak fluent Spanish and have a trade or skill that is in demand. Unskilled laborers are never allowed to immigrate to Mexico. Fluency in the local language is waived only for investors. To be fair, such requirements are typical for most nations.
As a foreign born citizen legally living in Mexico, you may never: receive any public assistance, hold any elected or public office (Federal, State and local), participate in any public protest or strike and own any waterfront property. Serving as a member of the clergy or as crews of Mexican-flagged ships or air planes are also prohibited. Certain legal rights are waived for foreign born residents of Mexico, including the right to a deportation hearing or other legal motions.
If you are in Mexico illegally, your life is much less "complicated". Illegal aliens are simply jailed and deported - no hearings, no petitions, nothing. The fate is the same for women that give birth in Mexico. Once deported, re-entering Mexico illegally will earn you a trip to prison for 10 years! Amnesty International has issued reports claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico, typically from Central America - its southern border, most often face abuse, rape, kidnappings and death, and that Mexican police do little to stop it.
Hellish as all that sounds, hundreds of thousands of persons from Central America make the 1,600 mile long trek north through Mexico by foot and by smuggling themselves inside or on top of rail cars. Suffice to say, many more Central Americans die on that journey than do Mexicans crossing into Arizona. Unlike the illegal immigrants entering the U.S. southern boarder, Mexico's illegal immigrants do not intend to make Mexico their final destination. Their aspiration is the same as those of the Mexicans citizens, to enter the U.S. by whatever means possible. Clearly, President Calderon believes such an opportunity should be reserved only for Mexican citizens, not some lowly illegal alien from Central America. Why? Money, and a lot of it!
Immigrants throughout the world, both legal and illegal, send a large percentage of their income back to their home countries via remittances. Remittances, Mexico's No. 2 source of foreign income after oil exports, totaled over $25 billion in 2008 from its citizens working legally and illegally in the U.S. Apparently President Calderon, a self-described devout Catholic, sees no shame or hypocrisy in denying that opportunity to its far poorer neighbors on its own southern boarder.
So to venture a guess as to the reason for President Felipe Calderon's hypocrisy, I would say it's nothing personal, it's just good for business. As as to why President Obama invited a foreign dignitary into his house to scold his own people, I would say it's nothing personal, it's just good for politics.
Article
