"In dismissing the illegal immigrants' complaint, the appeals court said Smith had erred in barring the identity procedures DMV Commissioner Raymond Martinez put in place and said they were "within his authority and enforceable." "
"The court noted cases in which one Social Security number was used to get licenses for 57 people and another in which one taxi driver used two numbers to get two licenses - one for insurance and the other for traffic tickets."
So, let me see if I have this right. One Social Security number was used to get licenses for 57 illegal immigrants, which to Justice Smith is ok, but for the DMV to require proof of legal status in order to legitimately get a license is wrong? What was she
"The plaintiffs in the case had argued that their constitutional rights were being violated. State officials defended the identity procedures as an effort to combat fraud and terrorism." Their Constitutional rights were being violated? Since when does the Constitution grant rights to illegal aliens? What Amendment states that illegal aliens have the same rights granted to them as those who have legal status, whether they be immigrants or citizens? Can anyone out there tell me which Amendment that is? I didn't think so.
Of course, an appeal of this proper, rational, and sane decision is planned by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, which represented the plaintiffs, presumably before the NY State Supreme Court. If this does go before that court, it is hoped here that they will affirm the Appellate Division in Manhattan's decision, and toss out the case as having no merit.
No comments:
Post a Comment