riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (01/18/85)
> Since when is it permissable for anybody, or any group of > people, (including any church) to violate the immigration laws of > the United States by illegally smuggling in aliens? The position of the Sanctuary workers who have been arrested is that they have in fact done nothing illegal. According to both international and U.S. law, innocent civilians fleeing war and political persecution are refugees, not illegal aliens, and have every right to stay in this country until the danger at home is over. Of course, the Reagan administration disagrees, since it refuses to recognize persecution coming from any direction other than the left. Whatever this administration would like you to think, the Sanctuary workers are not Coyotes; they are caring people who are willing to put their own freedom in jeopardy in order to help others in need. > ...And besides, what the hell do they > think they're changing by smuggling in a few hundred people anyway? Someone mentioned the Undergound Railroad. The comparison is an apt one: like that of the Underground Railroad, the impact of the Sanctuary movement can't be measured by the small number of people it is able to save directly, but rather by its presence as a sign of hope for the people left behind and its contribution to ending the conditions which are causing their plight in the first place. --- Prentiss Riddle ("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.") --- {ihnp4,harvard,seismo,gatech,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle --- riddle@ut-sally.UUCP, riddle@ut-sally.ARPA, riddle@zotz.ARPA
jcp@brl-tgr.ARPA (Joe Pistritto <jcp>) (01/18/85)
Sorry, must still disagree with you. While there is provision in US immigration law for refugees to enter the US, this provision may only be used WHEN THE US GOVERNMENT CERTIFIES that the people in question ARE refugees. This is a decision made in the executive branch of the government (Executive Order is sufficient). For instance, when the Mariel Cubans were coming in, the government certified them as refugees, thus eliminating their illegal status (although they still have to go thru normal in-processing via the immigration service). The same thing was done for the Vietnamese who entered when Vietnam fell. I say again: Those people from Central America are ILLEGAL ALIENS until the US gov't says otherwise, which makes anyone sheltering them in violation of Federal Law. Note: the international treaties on refugees are irrelevant, in the past, the US only recognizes as refugees people WE certify as such. There is no implicit right on the part of any non-US citizen to enter the United States unless given permission by federal authorities. This really is a matter of fact, not argument. -JCP-
myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeff Myers) (01/20/85)
> Sorry, must still disagree with you. While there is provision in > US immigration law for refugees to enter the US, this provision may > only be used WHEN THE US GOVERNMENT CERTIFIES that the people in > question ARE refugees. This is a decision made in the executive > branch of the government (Executive Order is sufficient). > > I say again: Those people from Central America are ILLEGAL ALIENS until > the US gov't says otherwise, which makes anyone sheltering them in > violation of Federal Law. > Cohabitation not in wedlock was illegal in Wisconsin 'till a couple of years ago. What does `legality' have to do with anything? Refugees are only those that WE certify! The royal WE? Ronnie and you? Try telling that to those who don't have their dogtags marked `refugee'. The whole point behind the sanctuary campaign is that our government certifies only refugees from leftist countries, thus sacrificing a moral policy for a political one bereft of much humanity. The sanctuary movement has been forced to do what our government should be doing. -- Jeff Myers The views above may or may not University of Wisconsin-Madison reflect the views of any other Madison Academic Computing Center person or group at UW-Madison. ARPA: uwmacc!myers@wisc-rsch.arpa uucp: ..!{ucbvax,allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!myers
garys@bunker.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) (01/22/85)
> I say again: Those people from Central America are ILLEGAL ALIENS until > the US gov't says otherwise, which makes anyone sheltering them in > violation of Federal Law. > > Note: the international treaties on refugees are irrelevant, in the > past, the US only recognizes as refugees people WE certify as such. Why are the treaties irrelevant? My understanding is that a treaty, once ratified, supercedes even the constitution. Gary Samuelson