The Border Patrol had the authority to come onto our farm without asking us, in the perpetual quest for illegal aliens. --- as it should be
How are all these things reconcilable with a free society? =--- we're free because of our ability to uphold our laws On Jun 30, 4:34 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Thursday, June 30, 2011Immigration Controls and a Police Stateby Jacob G. > Hornberger > YesterdayI commentedon conservative Pat Buchanan’s recent anti-immigration > rant. Today, I wish to comment on an aspect of immigration controls that both > conservatives and liberals rarely confront the federal government’s > police-state powers that come with enforcing immigration controls. > I’d venture to say that most Americans who are upset with the abusive tactics > of the TSA at airports have no idea that Americans who live along our > country’s southern border have had to deal with this type of federal abuse > for decades from the Border Patrol and the Immigration and Naturalization > Service. Over the years, the mindset among Americans living elsewhere in the > country, I think, has been, “Oh, well, it’s not happening to me, so why > should I care?” > Consider, for example, the fact that in Texas the Border Patrol has the legal > authority, under the guise of immigration controls, to arbitrarily enter onto > any private property that adjoins the Rio Grande. I have personal experience > here. I grew up on a farm that adjoined the river. We could easily see Mexico > whenever we drove down to the river to check on our irrigation pump. > The Border Patrol had the authority to come onto our farm without asking us, > in the perpetual quest for illegal aliens. If we closed the front gate to our > farm, they would simply open the gate and drive through, driving and > searching all over our farm. If we put a lock on the gate and failed to > provide them a key, they’d simply shoot off the lock and just enter onto the > property. > No warrant. No judicial process. Just simple trespass onto our private > property and everyone else’s along the border. > Now, I am certain that Pat Buchanan, like every other conservative who favors > immigration controls, would be the first to stand up in front of a Heritage > Foundation audience and exclaim proudly, “I’m a believer in private property > and free enterprise.” > I’m also sure that your standard liberal who favors immigration controls > would stand up in front of a Brookings Institute audience and exclaim > proudly, “I’m a believer in privacy and the Fourth Amendment prohibition > against unreasonable and warrantless searches and seizures.” > But with immigration controls, which both conservatives and liberals have > long favored, comes enforcement. And warrantless entry onto private property > by the Border Patrol has long been part and parcel of that enforcement. > Oh, I should mention that the Border Patrol’s power to arbitrarily enter onto > people’s private property extends not just to farms and ranches that actually > adjoin the border but also to private property that is miles away the border. > They call it the “functional equivalent of the border.” > There are also those infamous border-control checkpoints inside the United > States to consider. No, I’m not referring to the passport/drug-war checks at > the international bridges that span the Rio Grande or other border crossing > points. I’m talking about those official checkpoints that the feds have > established entirely inside the United States. For example, at the airport in > Laredo and on the highway heading north to San Antonio, the Border Patrol and > INS are there, asking travelers for their papers and searching their cars and > personal belongings even though most of the people are traveling entirely > within the United States. > For Anglo travelers, there is usually no problem, so long as they show the > proper deference to federal officials. Light-skinned Hispanics dressed nicely > or driving a late-model car are usually waved through. But if an Hispanic is > dark-skinned or obviously poor or riding the bus, he had better be carrying > his passport because he is going to be closely checked and returned to Laredo > if his papers are not in order or, even worse, deported to Mexico. > Or consider the countless drivers along the border who are arbitrarily > stopped by roving Border Patrol agents. A person can just be traveling along > a highway and be suddenly pulled over by the Border Patrol and ordered to > open up his trunk. No warrant. Just arbitrary stops based on such capricious > standards as “The car was riding a bit low” or “The driver was going a bit > too slow.” > How are all these things reconcilable with a free society? They’re not. > Instead, they are the epitome of a police state. They did these things in the > Soviet Union. They do them today in Cuba and North Korea. > Where do conservatives and liberals stand with respect to these police-state > policies? Usually they remain silent about them. But they might well favor > them or they might decry them. But what’s important to keep in mind is that > such policies are an integral part of enforcing immigration controls. Saying > that one is in favor of immigration controls and against a police state is > like saying that one favors lightning and opposes > thunder.http://www.fff.org/blog/jghblog2011-06-30.asp -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
