New Haven Independent

Posted by: Ben | June 11, 2007 10:17 PM

I would hope with the dep of homeland sec budget
the arrests are on film. When is he showing?

Posted by: come get em | June 11, 2007 11:05 PM

Please ICE come get the mayor and the members of his administration and all else who are violating US Code 8. I support the federal gov. in raiding every emploer in New Haven, and taking all seditious people out of power. I also support Mr. Fasano and other and encourage the State to stop all funding to New haven, based on the positioon it has taken to over ride federal law pertainging to ILLEGAL immagrants. Better yet, just arrest the mayor. If he wants to play the big civil rights boy. lets see if he cries less or more tha Paris

Posted by: Cap Coleman | June 12, 2007 12:43 AM

Oh, here he goes. Didn't take long for DeStefano to whip out the race card. He's now accusing the feds of "racial profiling". What a low life. Where did he learn how to use that card (otherwise known as a canard)? From Newton? (You know, the state legislator who got caught red-handed taking bribes and claimed he was busted because he was Black. DeStefano resorts to the despicable tactic of the left when it comes to debate on illegal aliens which is to smear those who insist on enforcement of the law with the brush of bigotry and racism.

Posted by: Ed Cook | June 12, 2007 10:26 AM

Constitutional Rights violated? How about breaking the law by entering this country illegally? How about the Mayor and city council abetting illegals by providing id's with knowledge that they are here illegally? Is that not a violation of the law? The mayor is way off base here.

I am sure when his ancestors immigrated, they were proud to follow the law and become citizens. He should be working with ICE to make sure that Illegals are rounded up and put into process. If they want to be a productive member of our country, then they need to apply and enter through the same process that millions and millions of immigrants have done before them.

America is based on immigration. "The Great Melting Pot". The real battle here is about the difference between an illegal entrant and a legal immigrant. If you are here legally, then you are entitled to all the rights and responsibilites of a citizen, otherwise you are entitled to nothing.

Posted by: Come On | June 12, 2007 1:24 PM

This was disgusting behavior. ICE agents forced their way into homes without warrants and found some undocumented immigrants. This is fundamentally unconstitutional behavior. That is why ICE is now saying, "We were invited into the home by the residents." Does anyone believe this? Residents invited people into their homes to allow themselves to be arrested? Would you allow officers into your home without explaining who they were or what they wanted? Would you allow police to search your home without a warrant?

Then ICE couldn't even get this right, as they found US citizens and plenty of people here legally when they actually got into some of the homes. No doubt this is why DHS has now made clear that they are "temporarily" putting a stop on these home invasions.

Even those of you who clearly hate immigrants should be very afraid of the actions of the federal government in these raids. They broke the law. Are you really more afraid of undocumented immigrants than of federal agents randomly forcing their way into homes without warrants? Don't let anyone tell you that this was about warrants.

By their own admissions, ICE went into at least eight homes, arrested 32 people and executed only four warrants. No way does that add up. They were on a fishing expedition. When they got lucky and found someone without id, they arrested the person. When they instead found a US citizen or legal resident who could prove it, they did not even say sorry, they just went to the next house.

And as to this nonsense about undocumented immigrants choosing not to become legal, get it through your thick skulls -- the US immigration policy is so broken that there is virtually no way to immigrate to the US right now. The only sure way to get deported is to go to ICE, tell them where you live and that you would like to apply for citizenship.

Posted by: who | June 12, 2007 1:28 PM

who are these affadavits addressed to that the mayor has?

Posted by: Bernard Bate | June 12, 2007 4:25 PM

The discussions on the comment pages here and in all stories related to the ICE arrests of last week indicate how well organized and motivated the nativists/totalitarians are. Anti-Latino writers from outside the community have swamped these pages with their letters. Let us be clear about who they are: organized by www.grassfire.org, www.alipac.us/ and other radical totalitarian groups, they advocate the forced deportation of 12-20 million people - which would represent by far the largest forced migration in history and the largest mass movement of human beings since the Partition of India/Pakistan in 1947. Bigger than the Trail of Tears. Bigger than the Catastrophe, the expulsion of the Palestinians from Palestine. Bigger than the expulsion of Jews from Arab countries.

By organizing these letter writing campaigns, they appear much larger and more powerful than they actually are. Nevertheless, the danger is that because they are so well organized, they will have disproportionate pull within the Republican Party which has already shown itself very capable of organizing small numbers of ideologically motivated people to compel the country into betraying its own values and best interests. [For background on these groups and the pull they have already generated in the Senate and House, see the NYT article on Sunday, 12 June 2007, 'Grass Roots Roared and Immigration Plan Collapsed.']

As citizens of New Haven, we have to stand firm for the kind of enlightened principles our Mayor, Board of Alders, and fellow citizens have loudly affirmed in the past week. And we shouldn't be fooled by the numbers of letters here that they are as numerous as they appear to be.

Posted by: Taxed To Death | June 12, 2007 5:08 PM

Bernard Bate: I'm not a member of any of those groups. I live in New Haven with my family, including a legal immigrant. Your slander and assumpitons don't cut it at my house, or my street, which also has other legal immigrants living on it.

DeStefano's latest rhetorical blast is as digusting as it is whiney, unfounded and unsupported by the facts. It's embarassing to watch him and his band of race baiters at City Hall hurl unfounded accusations at federal law enforcement officers doing their job. Today ICE was in North Haven -- I don't see that town's mayor waving the white flag of surrender and spitting out insults to those who would protect this country and enforce the law.

These affadavits aren't worth the paper they're written on -- So Junta and their enablers at City Hall together with Yale's School of Law are writing down the version as produced by children and others who have a vendetta. So what? That is not even half the story. Were they coached? Taken under oathe? and what should happen to these people when its revealed their testimony is faulty or outright lies? Go to jail? Scooter Libby is.

Further, even if all that the affadavits allege is true -- THEY DON'T HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS -- THEY'RE NOT CITIZENS and it's insulting for them to be called so. Being a citizen means learning the language, paying taxes, being legal, abiding by the laws of the land and protecting all that this country stands for. While DeStefano is now denigrating law enforcement -- other neighborhoods are being terrorized by another group of lawbreakers. Where's DeStefano on that? Where's Kica Matos in that Edgewood neighborhood? What are we coming to when good people are repeatedly attacked and the police and mayor give lip service only..and allow the attacks to continue? They're all fiddling on our dime while the city burns...shame on all of you.

Posted by: Brenda | June 12, 2007 5:49 PM

I agree with Bernard Bate. To Cap Coleman - If you read excerpts from the depositions you would know why the Mayor is calling it racial profiling - as in the case of the white woman and her son being left alone in the restaurant while agents asked all "Latino-looking" people for i.d.

One issue that seems to keep rearing it's ugly head here is the difference between legal and illegal. It seems that people are assuming that those who are here illegally don't have much reason beyond taking our jobs. Do you know why some of those people are here? Some of them are here because they would be tortured and/or murdered if they had not fled. Why did they choose to come here? Because we're always talking about how great and free our country is. What about starvation and poverty? Don't you think you would try to go someplace else if it meant living more than a barely subsistent life - no matter what means you use to get into that other place?

I'm sick of hearing that the issue is really about the "illegal" immigrants as if they are all a bunch of good-for-nothing criminals. Please, if you have so much anger about this, why don't you go out and talk to people and find out why they are here before you make judgments.

Posted by: For Who | June 12, 2007 6:00 PM

Affidavits are not addressed to anyone. They are sworn statements stating what a witness saw. So witnesses to ICE agents' actions have sworn to what they saw. Apparently the Mayor then shared these sworn statements with Secretary Chertoff and the raids were called off.

Sounds like ICE got caught with their constitution down. Pretty scary stuff.

Posted by: nfjanette | June 12, 2007 7:22 PM

Mr. Bate, you are deluding yourself about the nature of anyone opposed to uncontrolled illegal immigration and the mayors "enlightened principles" designed to circumvent federal laws. The opposition is far more diverse than you seem to believe, and most certainly does not merely consist of "nativists/totalitarians".

As for the forced deportation of illegal immigrants, the current proposed "compromise" bill in congress, although deeply flawed in some aspects, does attempt to find a mechanism for allowing many of those immigrants to stay if they satisfy various criteria.

Posted by: Aldon Hynes | June 12, 2007 10:01 PM

I must admit, I'm not versed in the legalities of what has happened, but if the affidavits are accurate, it sounds as if ICE agents may have committed illegal forcible entry, breaking and entering, or other related crimes.

I do hope that a thorough investigation determines who is really breaking what laws.

Posted by: Blackdog | June 12, 2007 10:35 PM

I guess I'll keep making this comment until ignorant people stop making it necessary: MOST OF OUR IMPORTANT RIGHTS ARE GUARANTEED TO PEOPLE OR PERSONS, NOT TO CITIZENS!!!!!

http://www.constitution.org/billofr_.htm
http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm

Posted by: AllAmericanMutt | June 12, 2007 10:39 PM

If the ICE Agents did enter the homes illegally then they will be in trouble. But please, stop defending people who have broken a law and got caught one way or another. When one of you is a victim of a crime committed by an ILLEGAL ALIEN, then you will be crying, where was ICE. When one of you marry an illegal alien, only to find out later the ALIEN is married and has a family somewhere else, you will be DEMANDING the ALIEN be deported. As for the person who wrote about "would someone let the COPS in their house to search without a warrant", Hey here is some breaking news....... IT HAPPENS EVERYDAY, either a house or a car isbeing allowed to be searched by a Stupid CRIMINAL".

Posted by: concerned | June 12, 2007 11:03 PM

As a concerned reader from all of these comments, I'd just like to respond to a
few. All in all, I understand your arguments and your sentiments on this issue,
but I do not feel that they are entirely justified nor helpful to the situation
at hand.

First, the issue pertaining to the ID program and the question raised: "Is that
not a violation of the law?" As explained in another Independent article by a
member of the Yale Law School, the ID program is not in violation of any U.S.
law. The ID program merely gives them access to bank accounts and library cards
and just some form of identification. This doesn't go against any U.S. statute.
Working to make the ID program a possibility took years of planning, there's no
way that throughout all of that time and deliberation a plan that was against
U.S. law would have been put forth. Also, the plan was supported by an
overwhelming majority of alderman (all but one), so you could put trust in
their approval as well.

The next argument was over the issue of race in dealing with these issues,
specifically the comment: "Didn't take long for DeStefano to whip out the race
card." I understand the frustration you might feel about the issues of racial
profiling, but also please recognize that these problems with illegal
immigration have an extensive history in the U.S. of racial bias. Since the
establishment of the Mexico-U.S. border in the 1840s, the concept of race and
racial inferiority has driven relations between the two countries. Look up the
forced repatriations of the 1930s in the southwest, the Bracero Program of the
1940s-60s, and the fundamental differences in border security in America's
southern border and its northern border with Canada. These issues are present
today in the immigration debate. Citizenship has become tied to race - a person
with brown skin is now assumed to be less likely to be a citizen than one with
lighter skin. This is shown in the evidence from this article regarding the
raid in the restaurant. Whether done by federal officials or ourselves in
everyday life, such assumptions about race are a serious problem and should be
dealt with. I feel that this issue should be looked at in the case of the ICE
raids not because it was necessarily done, but that it could a possible factor
in the way they perform their operations and could have serious negative
impacts on the people involved.

Another comment was that, "If they want to be a productive member of our
country, then they need to apply and enter through the same process that
millions and millions of immigrants have done before them." I ask that you
please understand that there is an extremely limited amount of ways to enter
the country through legal means, especially when entering from a very
impoverished country. Legal means for immigration are primarily given to those
with high education and wealth, something that very few of those seeking a
means of entering the U.S. have. With that said, I also ask that you reconsider
your term 'productive member of our country.' Many of these people are
productive, in that they work their low paying jobs, provide for their
families, attempt to give their children education, and pay taxes on their
income despite not having access to many services that those taxes go to. Yes,
I understand the arguments about the costs that undocumented immigrants cause
on health care and other services, but recognize that those are primarily due
to their already low economic status such as the inability to receive employer
based health insurance. I feel that those are concerns with our country's
systems, not necessarily with the people themselves.

Which brings me to my last point about undocumented immigrants being "entitled
to no rights." I understand the argument about "entering the country illegally"
and the issues it brings forth, but I question why we are even debating this. If
we are looking for solutions to the problems arising from this issue, that
argument is entirely counterproductive and only seeks to stigmatize other
persons. If you follow the debate, you know that the country recognizes that
mass deportations/repatrations are not a feasible or humane action to be done.
Mr. Cook asserts that no rights should be given to them, and no services
offered. But how is this a solution to the problem? How does this solve the
issues of health care costs, or eduation woes, or job complaints that many
people like himself raise? I don't believe it does.

I think programs like the municipal ID instituted by the city would help. I
think it would help a greatly marginalized community. I think it will help make
them even more productive members of the country by allowing them to safely save
money and invest in their children and families. I think that, as a result of
safer money-keeping, it will decrease crime rates of robberies and muggings in
a part of the city. I think that it will help a community of people just like
us that are in need of assistance without hurting any other residents of the
city in any significant way. I think that it is a strong way to deal with this
issue unlike any other city in the country, and a good way to get around the
counterproductive arguments about "entering the country illegally..." and
actually find solutions that can help the city.

I think it is time for Americans to stop shouting "deport them" and take a more
positive and humane stance on this issue.

Posted by: The Constitution | June 13, 2007 8:33 AM

Hey Taxed to Death,

You are wrong. The Constitution and Bill of Rights apply to everyone on US soil. This is why the Bush Administration has kept the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay open. They argue that these prisoners have not touched foot on US soil and thus are not protected by Constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The reason that ICE has suspended operations in Connecticut is that they know they have a big problem. Any arrest made unconstitutionally risks being thrown out by the courts and further risks undermining any other prosecutions they are making elsewhere in the country. They seem aware of their problem, even if you are not.

And if you think you are taxed to death now, what do you think would happen if these folks are sucked out of the New Haven economy? Welcome back to the boarded up businesses and vacant houses which depressed property values and drove up taxes for everyone. If you are a New Haven resident you will remember the crime and taxes of the early 1990s and all the problems throughout the city as people left causing businesses to close and houses to be abandoned. Whatever else you think, as a crusader on taxes, you should want these immigrants here paying rent (and thus property taxes) and keeping the new taxpaying stores in the Hill and Fair Haven open.

Posted by: Brandon | June 13, 2007 11:19 AM

As usual, the press is reporting only part of the story.

As soon as ICE determines that the person answering the door is an illegal alien, they may enter to arrest the alien. In the process of arresting that illegal alien, they have to conduct a search of the residence to make sure that it is secure before departing. The agents have to make sure that the oven isn't on or that there are children that will be left alone.

Also, all of you self-appointed attorneys should lookup the meaning of "warrantless arrest."

Posted by: Walt | June 13, 2007 2:01 PM

This site says ICE has promised to back down.

TV News says ICE says Hell no, we will continue to do our jobs,

What is truth?

Posted by: Come On | June 13, 2007 5:04 PM

Brandon,

Warrantless arrest? Get over your self. Of course a police officer can arrest someone in the process of committing a crime if they observe the crime taking place.

But they cannot enter a home without a warrant. That is a constitutional right and one of the reasons the Revolutionary War was fought.

I would say the obvious that you don't have a law degree but you actually appear to have missed 5th grade American history.

Posted by: Brandon | June 18, 2007 2:42 PM

So a police officer can not enter a home without a warrant to arrest someone? You'd better send that memo to the courts, because they're all lacking whichever bootleg lawbook you're reading.

But I'm sure you're well-versed in caselaw since you appear to be a jailhouse lawyer. Jailhouse lawyer meaning that you make up the law as YOU think the law OUGHT to be then cite your version to others as fact.