CO Supreme Court Gives Illegal Immigrants 4th Amendment Rights

Looks like the Colorado Supreme Court has taken another step in making illegal immigrants legal U.S. citizens by giving them U.S. Constitutional 4th Amendment protection to privacy.

Raid violated privacy rights of alleged illegal immigrants, Colorado's top court rules

The Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday that a 2008 raid of a local tax preparer's office aimed at building identity-theft cases against hundreds of suspected illegal immigrants violated their Fourth Amendment right to privacy.

The 4-3 ruling was the latest and most devastating legal blow against Operation Numbers Game, an investigation launched by Weld County Sheriff John Cooke and District Attorney Ken Buck that aimed to use tax returns to identify and prosecute illegal immigrants.

And the kicker to this story.

Wrong number: State Supreme Court rules Operation Number Games illegal

“I'm disappointed. We have 1,338 people whose identities are being used, and we can't even notify them they are the victims of identify theft,” Weld District Attorney Ken Buck said Monday before a press conference on the matter. “We had hoped to make an impact on identify theft in Weld, and I think that won't happen at this point, and it's a serious problem in Weld County.”

And this surprises you? We have to give rights to everyone, don't you read the news? Just being sarcastic........actually in light of the detainees getting brought here and the plan to give them the same right, I'm not surprised at all. It also wouildn't surprise me to see a couple of cities on the eastern slope wind up as sanctuary cities, much like they have in California.

Wait...who's rights were violated? The illegal immigrants who have no rights? Or the tax preparer who did nothing wrong to have his private records seized?

If its the former, I call bull#. If its the later, I say way to go courts!

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Rights are not given by courts, legislatures or you or I. Rights are inherent in all people and one does not have to be a citizen of the United States in order to enjoy the natural rights belonging to all people. The Fourth Amendment states:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It makes no distinction of citizenship nor nationality but refers to the people. If these rights do not belong to all people across the world and hold a universal self evidence, than they mean nothing at all.

I kind of like the fact that they are paying taxes.
As long as they are here they might as well pay taxes.
I wonder. if the sheriff does not have the socials how does he know they belong to other people?

#1: Multiple crimes happened in this case; including illegal immigration and personal identity theft to 1,338 innocent individuals. The District Attorney's office knows the identities of the victims of the stolen identities, but cannot notify them of this because of this CO Supreme Court ruling. How would you feel if someone stole something of yours as personal as your identity, but the courts told the law they cannot tell you because the privacy of the thief would be violated?

#2: These illegals were filing federal taxes to get money back they never paid in, not to pay taxes.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


I know how it feels, specially when children are the target also, I became a victim of identity theft, my bank account was compromised but thankfully my bank was able to stop it.

I say screw the crocks be illegals or none.

And as for the court ruling, the tax payer and citizens of CO should make camp in the capitol and demand their removal.

Since when we the people have not rights anymore, the only rights this butt kissing court have is the one that the legal citizens in the state is giving them.

People needs to wake up and take a stance, because everyday we are becoming nothing but losers.

I hope somebody released "by accident" the names of the victims to them and the press.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

 

Rights are not given by courts, legislatures or you or I. Rights are inherent in all people and one does not have to be a citizen of the United States in order to enjoy the natural rights belonging to all people. The Fourth Amendment states:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It makes no distinction of citizenship nor nationality but refers to the people. If these rights do not belong to all people across the world and hold a universal self evidence, than they mean nothing at all.

The United States is not a universal governing body! Nor does the universe contribute taxes to keep said government running!

While I applaud that you would like all people across the world to enjoy the freedoms that the United States has created in order to protect its citizens, you do realize that when one becomes a citizen of the US, you take an oath to uphold our constitution, abide by our laws, and once done you become protected under our constituion.

The constitution of the United States, and our Bill of Rights, is for the United States only. If one wants to benefit from the bloodshed that our forefathers underwent in order to make America the land of the free -- then I would suggest that a good place to start would be by NOT breaking the laws of this country that specifically state what is and is not LEGAL immigration.

Basically, this ruling provides rights to criminals (illegal immigration is a crime still in this country) that have no business being within our borders to begin with. The court should not even have heard their arguments.

Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
#1: Multiple crimes happened in this case; including illegal immigration and personal identity theft to 1,338 innocent individuals. The District Attorney's office knows the identities of the victims of the stolen identities, but cannot notify them of this because of this CO Supreme Court ruling. How would you feel if someone stole something of yours as personal as your identity, but the courts told the law they cannot tell you because the privacy of the thief would be violated?

#2: These illegals were filing federal taxes to get money back they never paid in, not to pay taxes.

How would I feel? Is that how rights work? As long as I'm outraged enough by the crime then rights be damned? You are not making any arguments for the victims you are making arguments against rights. Let's be clear about that.

[edit on 17-12-2009 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]

reply to post by lpowell0627


This issue has nothing at all to do with the United States imposing freedom on other nations. The Constitution for the United States has acknowledged that rights belong to all people. In fact, if there were such a thing as Klingon's and they resided with in the United States, then by the Supreme Law of that Land the police would be required to respect their rights, whether they be illegal or legal immigrants.

Paying taxes is not what makes rights, rights are not granted to "taxpayers" and the evidence of that is abundant. Ask the IRS for a copy of the "taxpayers bill of rights" and read that carefully to discover exactly what kind of rights are afforded there.

As to the Constitution applying to the United States only, the State of Colorado is within that Union, and the people in question were residing in that state when their 4th Amendment rights were violated. This is the law. Illegal immigrants may be criminals for being in the U.S. illegally and they may be criminals for actions after that fact, that does not distinguish them from the criminals who were born with in the U.S. who also have rights until proven guilty of a crime and convicted by law.

Learn the law!



[edit on 17-12-2009 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]

Originally posted by lpowell0627

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II

 

While I applaud that you would like all people across the world to enjoy the freedoms that the United States has created in order to protect its citizens, you do realize that when one becomes a citizen of the US, you take an oath to uphold our constitution, abide by our laws, and once done you become protected under our constituion.

\

It is a fallacious argument to insist the United States "created" freedoms. Before there was a Constitution for the United States, there was an Articles of Condederation which was the first Constitution the U.S. and prior to that there was a Declaration of Independence. These documents acknowledged the freedom that all ready existed and your arguments of freedom only existing because governments grant it, is a tyrants argument, no matter how benevolent that tyrant may seem. Rights granted by government are rights that can be taken away. Inalienable rights can not be taken away!

Look at the ignorance! lol

The United States Constitution is the law of the land, NOT the law of an institution.

Simply by being on U.S. soil you inherent the rights of the constitution.

This is why Americans can't do anything to illegal immigrants or harm them. The most we can do is deport them. Then again that might also be a violation of constitutional rights, just that the Mexicans don't know how to exercise them.

Now why do us "Americans" get treated like less than Mexicans if we have the same rights? It's because we are Live Stock for our currency. We agree to give up our rights, and as human beings we agree to represent a U.S. corporation with our identical name (with all capitals) and to be responsible for the corporation. Our Social Security Numbers are the I.D. numbers of the corporation. Your birth certificate is not the certificate of your birth, BUT the certificate of creation of your parallel corporation.

reply to post by Scarcer


When you try to teach people about rights in this nation for the citizens of the nation those that stand on the side lines of the "other side" will find any excuses to prove you wrong.

But the law is every explicit, is just that some like to interpreted in their own way and convenience.

I be darn if my rights are less of those that are illegal, and this coming from a Spanish born American.

Does this mean that Illegal aliens are eligable for Social Secrity Its't that system already bankrupt?

Originally posted by zachi
Does this mean that Illegal aliens are eligable for Social Secrity Its't that system already bankrupt?

I don't think being 'bankrupt' really means anything nowadays. The entire U.S. federal government is 'bankrupt' and that's didn't put one bit of a pause on the POTUS' Hawaii vacation, or Congress' spending patterns. As long as the Fed's printing presses are still whirring, everything is copacetic in their eyes.

I'm going to admit, I'm not a contitutional lawyer.

As I understand it, you're subject to a country's laws just by being there AND you're subject to the freedoms given by those countries.

"All men are created equal." Not, "All American citizens are created equal."

When a supreme court hears a case they consider the word of the law and the meaning behind the word of the law.

reply to post by links234


Your legal reasoning is sound and you are close however, "All men are created equal" is not law as such a decree is not in the Constitution, all though it can be found in some state constitutions and more importantly those constitutions declare that all People, not just men, are created equal.

The reason your legal reasoning is sound is what you said about how law is interpreted. Reading not just what is written but also what has not been written and at no point does the Constitution for the United States of America make the distinction that rights belong solely to citizens of the Untied States. Some may argue that the 14th Amendment has granted these rights to citizens of the U.S. but the point is moot since all rights this Amendment presumes to grant are all ready acknowledged as being rights that pre-exist the federal government anyway.

I am just quibbling when I say this, but your idea that people are subject to freedom is kind of contradictory. Who is subject to freedom or certain kinds of freedom is the federal and state governments who are restrained by Constitution from abrogating or derogating the rights of people, not citizens, but people.