Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member butterbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,181

    Court declines to review immigrant case

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... pagefrom=1

    review immigrant case

    By HOPE YEN
    ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

    WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether an employer can inquire about the immigration status of Latina and Southeast Asian women who are suing the company for job discrimination.

    Justices let stand a lower court ruling that said NIBCO Inc.'s questions during the early stages of the lawsuit were irrelevant to the issue of whether the company violated the Title VII federal law barring discrimination based on national origin.

    Martha Rivera and 22 other immigrant workers, formerly employed at NIBCO's Fresno, Calif. plant, sued the pipe and valve maker for discrimination after it required them to take a job skills test that was administered only in English. After performing poorly, the workers were demoted, transferred and eventually fired in 1998.

    During the lawsuit's fact-finding phase, NIBCO asked the workers about their immigration status, saying the information was needed to determine their entitlement to back pay and other potential money damages. The Elkhart, Ind.-based company said it would not disclose the workers' immigration status to outside parties.

    The former employees protested, citing a potential chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to assert workplace rights.

    The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. In an opinion by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the court noted that there are 5.3 million undocumented workers in the country, many of whom are reluctant to report discriminatory employment practices.

    "Granting employers the right to inquire into workers' immigration status in cases like this would allow them to raise implicitly the threat of deportation and criminal prosecution every time a worker, documented or undocumented, reports illegal practices or files a Title VII action," Reinhardt wrote.

    The case is NIBCO v. Rivera, 04-936.

    So they performed poorly on the the test which was being administered in english. And no one thinks it's important to check the status of these workers, being legal or illegal, for fear of him/her being discriminted against. Judge Reinhardt, whats up with that?
    RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member butterbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,181

    Court declines to review immigrant case

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... pagefrom=1

    review immigrant case

    By HOPE YEN
    ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

    WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider whether an employer can inquire about the immigration status of Latina and Southeast Asian women who are suing the company for job discrimination.

    Justices let stand a lower court ruling that said NIBCO Inc.'s questions during the early stages of the lawsuit were irrelevant to the issue of whether the company violated the Title VII federal law barring discrimination based on national origin.

    Martha Rivera and 22 other immigrant workers, formerly employed at NIBCO's Fresno, Calif. plant, sued the pipe and valve maker for discrimination after it required them to take a job skills test that was administered only in English. After performing poorly, the workers were demoted, transferred and eventually fired in 1998.

    During the lawsuit's fact-finding phase, NIBCO asked the workers about their immigration status, saying the information was needed to determine their entitlement to back pay and other potential money damages. The Elkhart, Ind.-based company said it would not disclose the workers' immigration status to outside parties.

    The former employees protested, citing a potential chilling effect on immigrants' willingness to assert workplace rights.

    The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. In an opinion by Judge Stephen Reinhardt, the court noted that there are 5.3 million undocumented workers in the country, many of whom are reluctant to report discriminatory employment practices.

    "Granting employers the right to inquire into workers' immigration status in cases like this would allow them to raise implicitly the threat of deportation and criminal prosecution every time a worker, documented or undocumented, reports illegal practices or files a Title VII action," Reinhardt wrote.

    The case is NIBCO v. Rivera, 04-936.

    So they performed poorly on the the test which was being administered in english. And no one thinks it's important to check the status of these workers, being legal or illegal, for fear of him/her being discriminted against. Judge Reinhardt, whats up with that?
    RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    desktop
    Posts
    1,760
    All I gotta say is ... just when you think you've heard it all - you hear something more insane! This is outrageous! But nowadays that seems par for the course.
    "This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position." .... Ronald Reagan

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    desktop
    Posts
    1,760
    All I gotta say is ... just when you think you've heard it all - you hear something more insane! This is outrageous! But nowadays that seems par for the course.
    "This country has lost control of its borders. And no country can sustain that kind of position." .... Ronald Reagan

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oak Island, North Mexolina
    Posts
    6,231
    Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Oak Island, North Mexolina
    Posts
    6,231
    Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  7. #7
    gp
    gp is offline
    gp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    166
    there's our tax dollars, hard at work for us.....

  8. #8
    gp
    gp is offline
    gp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    166
    there's our tax dollars, hard at work for us.....

  9. #9
    Senior Member butterbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,181
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlesoakisland
    Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
    So well put, Charlesoakisland!
    RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  10. #10
    Senior Member butterbean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,181
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlesoakisland
    Typical Supreme Court ruling. Now let me see if I have this right. An employer can be charged with a felony if the hire an illigal alien. But the Supreme Court says they can not inquire if they are illigal. This is typical lawyer double talk.
    So well put, Charlesoakisland!
    RIP Butterbean! We miss you and hope you are well in heaven.-- Your ALIPAC friends

    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •