Thread: Judge Dismisses Trespassing Charges Against Illegal Immigran

Aug 12, 2005

Judge Dismisses Trespassing Charges Against Illegal Immigrants
The Associated Press

This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBJOKHPACE.html




JAFFREY, N.H. (AP) - A judge on Friday dismissed trespassing charges against a group of illegal immigrants arrested by two small-town police chiefs who said they were frustrated by lax enforcement at the federal level.

The police chiefs in New Ipswich and Hudson were praised by law enforcement officers nationwide for their novel approach to homeland security. But lawyers for the immigrants argued that only the federal government has the power to regulate immigration, and that the state trespassing law was designed to apply to people intruding on private property.

"The criminal trespass charges against the defendants are unconstitutional attempts to regulate in the area of enforcement of immigration violations, an area where Congress must be deemed to have regulated with such civil sanctions and criminal penalties as it feels are sufficient," Judge L. Phillips Runyon III ruled.

The trespassing law says a person is guilty when he "knows that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place."

The immigrants, most of whom were from Mexico, were cited by police during traffic stops this spring after they produced fake identification and admitted they were in the country illegally. They pleaded innocent and were issued a citation - a violation akin to a parking ticket - which carries a fine and no jail time if convicted.

Last month, Runyon questioned lawyers on both sides at length about the use of the law and expressed doubt that he was the right authority to determine someone's immigration status.

AP-ES-08-12-05 1321EDT

What a BIG CHICKEN!! Watch out Big Rooster's comin' after you!!

Cluck! Cluck! SQUAWK!!!!

Without a valid New Hampshire Driver's License, the state of New Hampshire has EVERY RIGHT as does ANY STATE to bar ANY person from the boundaries of that state except on Federal Highways. I believe these were City Streets.

I'm sure ICE is racing to the court house steps to arrest and deport them?

ICE....oh ICE.....where are you?!?!?!?

The Judicial System can no longer be relied upon to "regulate" immigration. THEY ARE OUT!!

Now...WAKE UP AMERICA!!

The only way to solve this problem is to ensure they don't get in to begin with because as you can see Americans no longer control their governments. None of the government agencies are interested in protecting American Citizens under U S Immigration, U S Labor and U S Civil Rights Laws. They are interested in doing everything they legally can to aid and abet the presence of ILLEGAL ALIENS IN THE UNITED STATES rather than upholding the law which is to a) ensure they don't get in to begin with and b) once they do get in to get them out ASAP.

We are alone.

GO MINUTE MEN!!!

been kind of waiting for the end results before pushing that idea around here.

But lawyers for the immigrants argued that only the federal government has the power to regulate immigration, and that the state trespassing law was designed to apply to people intruding on private property.

"The criminal trespass charges against the defendants are unconstitutional attempts to regulate in the area of enforcement of immigration violations, an area where Congress must be deemed to have regulated with such civil sanctions and criminal penalties as it feels are sufficient," Judge L. Phillips Runyon III ruled.

I hope they appeal this case ....

1. these "illegal aliens" have no constitutional rights

2. under the Constitution, Congress has the power to "establish a uniform rule of naturalization" --- THAT'S ALL .... states have the right to determine residency

3. a state has the Constitutional right to defend itself against "invasion"

4. not only are these "illegal aliens" in violation state laws and "immigration laws" but they are in felony violation of the "law of nations"

NOt to mention operating a vehicle without a valid license and on a fradulent basis!!

Fake identification = Fake License

Fake License = No right to be in New Hampshire

No right to be in New Hampshire = No right to be on New Hampshire Soil

No right to be on New Hampshire Soil = TRESPASSING

Charlesoakisland--Go for it on this basis. You never know if the city lawyer bombed out. Notice the statement that the Judge "consulted" with the two lawyers. One of the two would be the City Attorney. Maybe he was in a hurry that day and didn't prepare as well as he should have or who knows. When the Judge "consults" with the two lawyers, this is in the "chambers" closed to the public and the clients.

The Judge wasn't asked to rule on federal immigration law. He was simply asked to rule on whether or not these aliens were in New Hampshire in violation of New Hampshire law and local ordinance laws. There were not invited; they were not residents; they were not citizens; they were not licensed drivers; they were not licensed workers; they were not employed by a licensed New Hampshire company; they were not legal "tourists"; they were not legal "visitors". If you are not a legal resident, a legal tourist, a legal worker of the state or nation...then it seems to be you have no permission to enter the soil of New Hampshire or North Carolina or any other of the 50 United States of America.

The Not a this and Not a that...= Not allowed on premises = Trespassing.

The Police Chiefs should go to Law School and one run for City Attorney and the other one for Judge.

the judge violated the 14th amendment rights of all citizens of the several states ---- how many "citizens" could be found not guilty of vagrancy and trespass?

What ever happened to "citizens arrest" laws?

To my knowledge, you can still make a Citizen's Arrest like the guy out in Arizona who arrested 6 or 7 illegals while walking his dog. They let 6 of the illegals go after a deposition where they turned evidence on No. 7, the guy driving the vehicle they got into as they crossed the border and arrested him the American Citizen for his Citizen's Arrest...had him locked up for 4 days....finally released and set free for doing his Civic Duty.

I don't know what they did with the dog.

Originally Posted by Mamie

the judge violated the 14th amendment rights of all citizens of the several states ---- how many "citizens" could be found not guilty of vagrancy and trespass?

That's right

I once saw a comedian who said, "I don't know why they let me vote on those judges. I don't know anything about them."

I hope the word gets out about this judge.

The police chiefs in New Ipswich and Hudson were praised by law enforcement officers nationwide for their novel approach to homeland security. But lawyers for the immigrants argued that only the federal government has the power to regulate immigration, and that the state trespassing law was designed to apply to people intruding on private property.

"The criminal trespass charges against the defendants are unconstitutional attempts to regulate in the area of enforcement of immigration violations, an area where Congress must be deemed to have regulated with such civil sanctions and criminal penalties as it feels are sufficient," Judge L. Phillips Runyon III ruled.