Undocumented immigrant can practice law, California Supreme Court rules

page: 3
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Like most legal terms, "Illegal immigrant" is not a reasonable term, so I put that in quotes. "Immigrant" refers to a person. But, people them self are not illegal. Its not as if you are illegal for existing. Behavior is illegal. Illegal immigration is a behavior phrase so I won't often put it in quotes.

Instead of having a cannon of ethics intruding on lawyers lives outside of the courtroom, it would be better to subject everyone in courtrooms to an acceptable range of behaviors in the court-room. If they demonstrate good courtroom behavior, then let them be in a court-room. If they demonstrate unacceptable courtroom behavior, then don't let them in the courtroom. It is much much too easy to be disbarred in all US states because the states micromanage lawyers lives and most offensively disbar lawyers who bring up a juries right to nullification.

In the state of New Hampshire everyone is permitted to represent everyone else in court. That system seems to work just fine. So long as the person is honest about not having a license there is no problems. That is just the way it should be. While New Hampshire may not be an illegal immigration hotbed, I imagine if it were, there would be no rush of illegal immigrants representing other people in court eager to become do-it-yourself lawyers. And furthermore hardly a soul in New Hampshire actually use someone who isn't state-licensed to practice law even though they can do that.




posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 


It makes you an American with a different point of view. We still have 12+ million people living in America without a status.
Do you think being labeled illegal for the act of being present and some without choice to be present and living in a world they know to be their own and yet not be part of that world, of that system and therefore illegal subject to punishment to the full intent of the law? The definition of law is defined as a system of rules that a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties. It seems it is only a problem because us (the members) are making it so. I will also point out that illegal crossings in the last few years have dropped dramatically and enforcement works.

We still have 12+ million people living in America without a status.



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 04:07 AM
link   
You either accept the constitution or you don't . It is a definitive answer. Emotions should not be involved.



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by fractal2
 


I'm sorry but I don't play word games.

The violation of immigration law is a felony. Hence, criminal, ergo they ARE Illegal Aliens or Criminal Immigrants.

We can just call then fugitive felons too, and be perfectly accurate...except we have law enforcement today that is exceptionally picky about which felonies they deem worthy of their time to pursue.

Change the law...don't play like it doesn't exist. They are criminals by pure, straight literal definition. It's not subjective opinion. It's legal status which doesn't change by altering the wording.



posted on Jan, 6 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by fractal2
 


Ok, then, what do you call the guy who barges into your house and tells you he is now going to live there, thank you very much?

He's not a burglar because he's not taking anything away. He's just living in your house without your permission. He's a trespasser, and that makes him illegal according to definition. Look it up.

So, sorry, people can very much be illegal.



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Horatius
 


Yes she would have come here legally. While my mother came to the country to improve her life, think about this, she graduated high school early in a 3rd world country at the time, then came to the u.s. to go to college in the 1960's. My mom is one smart lady, a bit to far left for me, but very smart non the less. My father is an ex marine, the language in the house was English, even though my parents went to Peru for 7 YEARS, waiting for my moms paperwork to process. Second with my wife coming from Europe (Latvia), and I myself having to wait 2.5 years to get her here, I personaly know the struggle. So yes, I know exactly whats going on in the immigration situation, and I have ABSOLUTELY NO, NONE, SYMPATHY for anybody that comes to this country illegally then gets a free hand out. Do we need immigration reform, absolutely, but that reform can not grant amnesty, Reagan did it once for 5 million. now we have 12 million illegals. This isn't a Mexican issue, its an illegal issue. I don't just think that Mexicans devalue the wages, its all of them, Mexicans, Central americans, S. Americans, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cuban, Haiti, etc. I don't care where you come from, and what your story is, a nation of laws isn't about stories, its about following the rules, go back to your country and get in line.



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 


I'd call someone trespassing on my property an intruder, a trespasser, or a robber. Saying "illegal intruder" sends a mixed message. If people can be illegal as you claim, then depending on the context, "illegal intruder" may be an illegal person doing a legal intrusion, a legal person doing an illegal intrusion, or an illegal person doing an illegal intrusion. Plus, when using any legal term, you're quoting a specific organization. For example, an illegal pass could be illegal from the perspective of the NBA but legal from the perspective of the United States. Because of this it would be fair to put "illegal pass" in quotes even if it was both illegal and a pass, and it would even be fair to put "illegal passer" in quotes too.

The main point I was making was that everyone should have free speech. Unless an illegally immigrated person is doing *harm* by representing someone in court, then they should be allowed to represent someone in court. Where is the harm in someone who ignores immigration laws representing someone in court? As I said before, if I'm in legal trouble and I need the best person for the job representing me. If I'm facing a serious charge, I want anybody who can do the best job as my representative regardless of what they've done outside the courtroom. In New Hampshire anybody can represent anyone else in court. Do you suppose that allowance been more help or more hurt for justice?

Laws should be based on actual real damages, not based on what offends conservatives as being socially unacceptable or awkward.



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You are welcome to avoid participation in word games. I respect your choice to call the subjects of this thread illegal aliens or criminal immigrants.

You're right I don't care about illegal immigration and also that I ignore laws I disagree with instead of changing them, but that is off-topic. Once you have illegally immigrated, what is then the policies that make the most sense? I suggest to allow all criminals the same rights and privileges as everyone else until they threaten further harm. When they threaten further harm, do whatever is necessary to stop the threat. What is the threat of an illegally immigrated person specifically in a case where they are attempting to speak on someone's behalf in court or in other legal contexts?

By the way, thanks for your welcoming of me. I've had an ATS account but don't have the login information anymore. Its been a couple years since I've posted.
edit on 7-1-2014 by fractal2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 09:20 PM
link   
at least he charges for the price I would worry more about those home on the comp the market



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 08:48 AM
link   
reply to post by fractal2
 



You're right I don't care about illegal immigration and also that I ignore laws I disagree with instead of changing them, but that is off-topic.


Actually, for me? That is the start and finish of the whole topic, right there. I've mentioned this before so it's nothing secret but my own family is touched by this whole thing. My Dad is American up through generations I can trace back several centuries, thanks to someone in the family who made it their little mission in life. My mom, however, still carries her Perm. Residency card from childhood. She too was brought over as a kid, but her family did it properly and went through the checks, medical quarantine and everything else that was a part of the process at that time. ...I've also come to deeply HATE illegal immigration of all kinds, from ANY source ...as a result of that exposure to seeing it done the LEGAL way.

In the end? We're a nation of law or we aren't. If we pick and choose what laws we like and want to matter? My choices WILL differ from yours and we'll both have different ideas than a 3rd guy. Once we start down the road of "disregarding law"...we've lost everything that made America anything special vs. anywhere else in the world.

* Oh, and Welcome of course!
I'm real passionate about some topics, but you'll find I debate topics, and rarely ever people.. In fact, it's not uncommon to lose track of names entirely outside the thread to look at, for how little I really pay attention to specific people vs. the topics.
edit on 8-1-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I think a point that is missed is that we are comparing legal immigration 150 years ago with legal immigration now. If all it took was to get money to buy a ticket cross Atlantic boat ride, be healthy, willing and complete registration then we would not have the problem we have now. I am seeing replies and arguments, touting how many generations this and how legal they did that and comparing it to modern day immigration with different types of visas, the required forms, fees and the many, many steps in the immigrant visa “waiting” process. It is not the same. There was a time in our history as Americans were we changed laws, specifically immigration laws that were written to support a pre- civil rights movement era – that’s a real politically correct way of saying we were a little racist as a society. Look up “Operation Wetback” for example. We also have to put aside our personal experiences because I think much of the sentiment is, “well I had to wait” , “my European wife had to wait”, “why Mexicans get free”, yes it sucks if you had to experience immigration problems but the reality is that immigration reform can solve all those problems. We still have 12 million people in America without statuses- we love to criticize other countries and their human rights records yet we probably have the worst record, if truth be told. People are not illegal, the act of being is not illegal, breaking and entering private property is not the same as being present in a country and living and working and being part of a community.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Horatius
 





I can tell you that you don’t want to be a undocumented migrant and a few days in any undocumented migrant shoes and you will see that there is a lot of Kool-Aid being passed around by those who oppose immigration reform and who surely have influence you to post this thread


What 'koolaid'' would that be ?

People get to pick and choose what laws they want to follow, and if any group of people don't like them oh well ?

Society has laws for a reason.

They are for everyone or no one.

If that is the case then I don't have to follow gun control laws.

Someone else gets to choose something else.

Last time I checked this country was suppose to be all about ' no one is above the law'.

Guess that is only lip service.
edit on 8-1-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Horatius
 






immigration reform can solve all those problems. We still have 12 million people in America without statuses- we love to criticize other countries and their human rights records yet we probably have the worst record, if truth be told. People are not illegal, the act of being is not illegal, breaking and entering private property is not the same as being present in a country and living and working and being part of a community.


Immigration reform is amnesty for illegals. They get to stay and work and live here while those immigrating legally pay a price and wait their turn. This is neither fair nor right.




breaking and entering private property is not the same as being present in a country and living and working and being part of a community

By being present in a country illegally, they are taking jobs that our millions of unemployed people could be taking. As for being part of the community, many illegals have no desire to speak english and segregate themselves from the rest of society.

The only thing that came from amnesty in the past, was more illegals, millions of them.





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join