Thread: Court says immigrant food-stamp cuts

Court says immigrant food-stamp cuts constitutional

By Terry Baynes | Reuters – 20 mins ago...

(Reuters) - Washington state did not violate the constitutional rights of legal immigrants when it discontinued their food stamp benefits, a federal appeals court ruled on Wednesday.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld state budget cuts that eliminated food assistance benefits for certain legal immigrants, reversing a lower court that had blocked the money-saving measure.

"States constitutionally can do precisely what Washington did here: provide supplemental benefits when the state's coffers bulge, but eliminate them when the state's resources diminish," the three-judge panel wrote.

Washington had participated in the federal government's food stamp program since its inception in 1964, distributing federal benefits to citizens and non-citizen residents alike.

In 1996, the federal government dramatically scaled back the benefits for non-citizens, requiring them to meet a host of prerequisites, including a five-year residence requirement. In response, the state of Washington decided to fill the gap, providing state food benefits to legal immigrants who no longer qualified under the federal welfare program.

Facing budget reductions, Washington terminated its food assistance program in February 2011, stripping over 10,000 households of state benefits. Qualified citizens and non-citizens continued to receive federal food stamp benefits.

Monica Pimentel, a legal immigrant and mother of three, sued in 2011 to block the new cuts, accusing the state of violating the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. As a victim of domestic violence, Pimentel was entitled to be in America, but did not meet requirements for federal food assistance.

The district court judge Marsha Pechman agreed with Pimentel, blocking the cuts. But the 9th Circuit panel overturned the lower court.

Court says immigrant food-stamp cuts constitutional - Yahoo! News

As a victim of domestic violence, Pimentel was entitled to be in America

Very bad law! Lord, I'm starting to hate the word "entitled."

As a victim of domestic violence, Pimentel was entitled to be in America, but did not meet requirements for federal food assistance.

As long as she's held to the same standards as American citizens, I see no problem with discontinuing assistance in accordance with the requirements. It appears she wants special rules for herself only.

Originally Posted by MW

Very bad law! Lord, I'm starting to hate the word "entitled."

Like Julia Roberts said in Pretty Woman " HUGE MISTAKE''

Not so fast. Only legal immigrants are affected. Non-citizens and "citizens" are not affected. This tells me that legal immigrants, green card holders, that have fallen on bad times in this ecomony are affected but non citizens, illegals, and their jackpot children are protected and are not losing benefits.

Wash. To End Food Stamps For
Legal Immigrants

Liz Jones
01/10/2011

ShareThis
As lawmakers reconvene in Olympia Monday, social service advocates will also be there to fight for benefits for low–income people. One program they hope to save is the state's food–stamp program for immigrants who are in the country legally. KUOW's Liz Jones reports.

TRANSCRIPT

The state's food–stamp program was created 13 years ago in response to cuts to the federal program. Those cuts ended benefits for many legal immigrants. Primarily they're people with green cards who've been in the US less than five years.

Nearly 14,000 low–income people in Washington use the state program, about half are children. The average food benefit is $114 a month. But it appears that's coming to an abrupt end.

Camp: "The notifications are expected to go out on the 15th."
That's John Camp with the state Department of Social and Health Services. He says the state plans to terminate the program at the end of this month.

The cuts are expected to save more than $60 million in the next two years. Camp says the state plans to reinvest some of the savings in other food programs.

Camp: "In order to help ease the blow of this program going away, we are working with the Emergency Food Assistance Program and the Washington State Department of Agriculture to help them increase their capacity to serve people with this increased need."

That emergency food program provides funding to food banks and other groups that help feed the hungry. Jon Gould is deputy director of the advocacy group Children's Alliance. He says food banks are already overwhelmed and can't compensate for the loss.

Gould: "We know that the food–stamp program is the number one defense against hunger. And we know when fewer people have access to food stamps, hunger rises. We have already seen a dramatic increase in childhood hunger, we fear that losing this program would make that increase worse."

A recent federal report found 36 percent more households in Washington experienced hunger in 2009, compared to the previous year.

Gould: "This loss couldn't come at worse time. Losing food assistance coupled with potentially the loss of health care and other social services. It's the worst possible time to have families experience that loss."
The Children's Alliance and other advocates are pushing lawmakers to keep the food–stamp program alive. At the very least Gould says he'd rather see the state reduce the monthly benefit to families, than cut the program altogether.

KUOW News.





Senate Democrats Blog
Thursday, February 03 2011 - Adam Kline

Food Benefits for Legal Immigrants Restored…for now

Paragraph # 6 of article.

The class action lawsuit filed by legal immigrants claimed that DSHS was violating the legal immigrant’s constitutional right to equal protection by eliminating food assistance to legal immigrants while continuing to provide food assistance to citizens and non-citizens. The lawsuit also maintains that DSHS violated the legal immigrant’s right to due process by sending inadequate explanation of the terminations, and not providing a workable way for immigrants to appeal the termination if, for example, they have lived in the U.S. for more than five years.

Complete article at:
Food Benefits for Legal Immigrants Restored

From what it sounds like to me the same new rules also apply to illegal aliens as legal immigrants who don't meet federal standards. It sounds as though the article is written to try and show the poor legal immigrant side while ignoring the same rules also take away from illegal aliens as less sympathy for the illegal alien.

On the domestic abuse side while I don't condone domestic abuse. I have seen many immigrant wives come over on fiancee / spousal visa's not even really knowing their husband / future husband all for the sake of getting a ticket into the US. They don't take the time to get to know their supposed lifelong partner or make sure they are a decent person. Then they come over and when find out they married a piece of abusive scum they cry that they should be able to stay but want out of the marriage. To me I see it as committing a crime and not being willing to pay the penalty. Few cases seem to fall oustside of the normal boundaries.

For further into it all that is required to file a fiancee visa is meeting in person once in the last 2 years (common is a 1-2 week vacation trip) and showing an ongoing relationship such as emails and instant message chat logs. In many of the countries these women come from you can meet day 1 and day 2 get married. The more strict countries have a 10-21 day waiting period.

Hence why I have no sympathy for those rushing into things just for a ticket to the US. If you want out within the first year you can go back home.

It's crazy that we should be giving any government money to non-citizens. Nobody who is not a US citizen should be getting anything whatsoever from any part of the US government, federal, state or local at any level. If you are not a US citizen and you can't support yourself you need to go back where you came from.