Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

  1. #1
    Senior Member Brian503a's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    California or ground zero of the invasion
    Posts
    16,029

    Day laborer dilemma

    http://www.newstimeslive.com/news/story.php?id=1015934

    Day laborer dilemma
    Westchester case could have impact on Danbury workers

    By Elizabeth Putnam
    THE NEWS-TIMES
    | | |

    Day laborers wait in Kennedy Park in downtown Danbury. A Westchester County, N.Y., court case could have an impact on the workers.
    DANBURY -- City officials and leaders of immigrant groups are watching a lawsuit against the village of Mamaroneck, N.Y., that could further define the rights of day laborers in Danbury and other communities nationwide.
    Six unidentified day laborers filed a lawsuit earlier this year in Federal District Court in White Plains, N.Y., alleging that the village violated the 14th Amendment by closing down the village-designated hiring site and harassing day workers as part of a larger plan to remove them from the area.

    The case went to trial earlier this month before Judge Colleen McMahon. A decision in the non-jury case could be reached by mid-October.

    The judge's outcome and written opinion on the case could impact the approximately 100 day laborers who wait at Kennedy Park in downtown Danbury on most weekdays for contractors. It could set a precedence for how Danbury's police and government handle workers who are hired on a day-by-day basis by contractors or individuals and typically paid one day at a time.

    The six day laborers in the Mamaroneck case, whose immigration status was not disclosed in the case, say the U.S. Constitution protects them from discrimination based on race and national origin and from arbitrary treatment by the government under the 14th Amendment.

    But what the impact is will depend on how far the judge takes the case, said Chris Newman, legal programs coordinator for the National Day Labor Organization Network.

    "I would hate to speculate. The effect in terms of what this does in other cities may not be much. We really are unsure which way the judge will rule," said Newman, whose organization is helping the day laborers. "This case is very fact specific, which could narrow the impact. But we will have to wait and see."

    Kevin Plunkett, an attorney for Thatcher, Proffitt and Wood in White Plains and lead attorney representing the village, said the case deserves watching because of its national scope.

    "It's a template for interaction with day laborers and neighborhoods that they are in," Plunkett said.

    Authorities shut down the village-designated area for people looking for work, who then moved to sidewalks and the streets. Police, who previously patrolled the designated site, continued to monitor them.

    Police and village officials claim they received dozens of complaints about laborers running out into traffic, urinating in public and littering, among other things. They had concerns about public safety and quality of life despite years of good communication between the mayor and leaders of immigrant communities, Plunkett said.

    Laborers accused police and village officials of discriminating against them because they are Hispanic.

    Changes at Kennedy Park

    In Danbury, the police department stepped up patrols near Kennedy Park with police officers on bicycles and sometimes patrol cars after receiving complaints from drivers about workers darting out into traffic.

    And for the past two months, Spanish-speaking police informed workers at Kennedy Park that they must stay at the park and not wait along Main Street.

    These safety and traffic concerns led agents from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency to arrest 11 illegal immigrants from Ecuador on Tuesday who were waiting for jobs near Kennedy Park.

    The arrests, which happened at 6:30 a.m., were conducted by ICE and the Danbury Police Department.

    Although Danbury officials have never shut down Kennedy Park to day laborers and has no intention of doing so until the space is needed for a new project, the case does highlight a larger issue about how local governments regulate public spaces, said Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton.

    Although Boughton is following the Mamaroneck case, he said, "it's an apple and oranges comparison" with Danbury.

    As long as the day laborers do nothing illegal while at Kennedy Park and don't affect traffic, "there are no problems," he said earlier in the week, shortly after learning about ICE's arrests and before leaving for Sao Paulo, Brazil, for a conference on immigration. He is expected to return today.

    Danbury Police Chief Al Baker said he has heard about the Mamaroneck case, but is not that familiar with its details.

    "I do know that the actions we take are more focused on public safety. We are not trying to make people leave the park like in (the Maramoneck case)," Baker said.

    City officials acknowledge Kennedy Park as the site for day laborers to find a job. In 2004, Boughton offered to build an indoor gathering place for contractors to find workers and negotiate work terms and to reduce the traffic congestion created when contractors stop to pick up laborers who gather near roadways.

    But after dozens of residents complained, the idea was scrapped, and Boughton has not brought it up again.

    The day laborers will have to move from Kennedy Park in the near future when construction begins on a new complex. Developer BRT of Danbury plans to build 586 condominiums and 5,000 square feet of retail space between Kennedy Avenue, Main Street and Rose Street.

    Boughton said the city does not plan to provide an alternative site for the workers, but when the time comes for them to move, he will call on leaders of the immigrant and religious communities to help the workers find other accommodations.

    Wilson Hernandez, a leader in the Ecuadorean community, said the situation affects the whole community and a more open dialogue between government, police and immigrants must happen.

    The Mamaroneck case shows Danbury what happens when that communication fails, he said.

    "I want to live in a city where every single citizen is safe and the quality of life is about the same for everyone," Hernandez said.

    Mamaroneck, N.Y., case details

    The laborers' names and whether they are in the country legally have been withheld from the court.

    U.S. District Court Judge Colleen McMahon has said the laborers' names and immigration status are not important to the case because they are seeking protection under the 14th Amendment. The Constitution offers equal protection to individuals regardless of their status, as long as they are in the country.

    McMahon did not, however, permit anonymous testimonies in the original lawsuit, which alleged that the village also violated the First Amendment.

    The lawsuit against the village was filed by the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Eduction Fund, a national advocacy organization based in New York City.


    Contact Elizabeth Putnam
    at eputnam@newstimes.com

    or at (203) 731-3411.
    Support our FIGHT AGAINST illegal immigration & Amnesty by joining our E-mail Alerts at http://eepurl.com/cktGTn

  2. #2
    Senior Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    5,262
    This case is reliant on the interpretation of the 14th ammendment to the Constitution as found in the Horace Gray gloss of the Wong Kim Ark decision and not anything intrinsic to the Constitution.

    This again shows people here in contempt and defiance of US legal jurisdiction seeking to justify actions by being within the US' physical jurisdiction.
    I support enforcement and see its lack as bad for the 3rd World as well. Remittances are now mostly spent on consumption not production assets. Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Posting Permissions

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