Thread: Illegals Make Out Like Bandits

Chattanooga Free Press
Editorials
Tom Grissom
Lee Anderson

Americans are rightly troubled when government takes land from private citizens and gives it to other private citizens, rather than limiting the taking of private property to clear public uses. But what are we to make of the hand-over of a U.S. citizen's property to illegal aliens?

Two illegals from El Salvador crossed from Mexico into Arizona in early 2003. A citizens group that patrolled the border caught the illegals on a ranch. The aliens admit that after being held for about an hour, they were sent on their way with food, water, and a blanket. But, they also claim they felt threatened by the Americans, and that the incident left them with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Among the men who caught the illegals was Casey Nethercott. He denied abusing them, and a jury in a criminal case did not convict him of any abuses.

But amazingly, the illegals were permitted to file a civil suit in a U.S. court against him, the owner of the ranch where the illegals were caught and a third man who was helping patrol the border. When it was all over, the lawbreaking invaders had won a $100,000 settlement against the ranch owner and judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against the third man.

As if that were not bad enough, Mr. Nethercott had to hand over his own 70-acre ranch to the illegals! Meanwhile, the aliens are not being deported.

That is wrong on many levels. If Mr. Nethercott abused the aliens-- though it was not proved that he did-- then prosecution would be in order. We do not condone vigilante violence, however frustrating the problem of illegal immigration.

But illegals should have no right to file a civil suit in a U.S. court. They should be entitled only to a quick trip home. And it is disgusting that they should benefit from their misdeeds by being named the new owners of a ranch in a country where they had no right to be in the first place.

Edited to add I do not have a direct link to the editorial as I copied it from the newspaper, and the editorials are not printed on the Chattanooga Free Press website.

However, after searching for the full story, I discovered it on the NY Times website.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/19/national/19ranch.html

Welcome Bryant13.

Interesting article. Thank you for posting it here.

It is customary for news articles to have a url link at the top that leads to the original article online.

Please edit your post and put the link in if you can find it. Notice how the links are positioned on the other articles in the news area.

Again,

welcome to ALIPAC


William

When it was all over, the lawbreaking invaders had won a $100,000 settlement against the ranch owner and judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against the third man. . . .

. . . But illegals should have no right to file a civil suit in a U.S. court.

aliens -- legal or illegal -- do not have the right to sue in the courts of the United States under the laws of the United States and the "so called" judge was operating OUTSIDE of the Constitution and the law without personal jurisdiction of the parties . . .

because the judge lacked 'personal jurisdiction' of the parties, the judgement of the court is VOID AB INITIO -- void 'from the beginning' . . . AND the judge was proceeding without immunity because he was not performing a "judicial act" . . .

in other words, the defendants have a right to sue the judge for damages . . . including taking possession of HIS PRIVATE PROPERTY . . . the judge should get his "just deserts"