Thread: Christie clarifies: 'Illegal' immigrants are in civil violat

Christie clarifies: 'Illegal' immigrants are in civil violation
by Brian Donohue/ Star-Ledger staff
Tuesday April 29, 2008, 12:03 PM
Noah Addis/ The Star-Ledger

Note: With bureaucrats like this dope in the federal government is there any doubt as to why the feds have created the massive mess we are now in today with 38 million illegal aliens running amok?



U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie speaks at First United Methodist Church of Dover on SundayThe office of U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie on Monday issued a statement addressing criticism of remarks he made regarding illegal immigration at a church forum in Dover Sunday.

In response to a question from an audience member, Christie said that immigrants are not committing a crime by being in the country illegally.


Monday, Christie said that while entering the country illegally is considered a federal misdemeanor, simply lacking legal immigration status is a civil violation.

"I can only enforce the laws that they give me," Christie said at the forum sponsored by the Latino Leadership Alliance of New Jersey and the First United Methodist Church of Dover.

Christie's comment drew criticism from Morristown Mayor and Democratic congressional candidate Donald C. Cresitello, as well as scores of comments on Internet message boards.

Critics called his statements incorrect, and indicative of a lax approach to immigration enforcement by the federal government.

Monday, Christie's office is sued a written statement defending the comments, saying they accurately reflected federal law.

"He did not say, nor did he mean, that entering this country through any means other than the appropriate immigration channels is a lawful act," the statement read. "It is not."

The controversy has highlighted one of the most widely misunderstood aspects of immigration law.

Q: Christie said immigrants in the county illegally are not automatically committing a crime by their presence. Is that true?

A: Yes. "Illegal presence" as the offense is called, is not a violation of the U.S. criminal code. A person cannot be sent to prison for being here without authorization from immigration authorities. It is, however, a violation of civil immigration laws, for which the federal government can impose civil penalties, namely deportation.

Q: But he was later asked a hypothetical question about someone sneaking across the border and said that's not a crime either. Is that true, too?

A: No. "Improper entry by an alien" as it is called, is a violation of Title 8 of the U.S. criminal code punishable by a fine of between $50 and $250 and/or a maximum of six months in jail.

It is considered difficult to prosecute because unless authorities catch someone in the act of crossing the border, it is easier to just deport them than spend the time and money needed to prove how they crossed the border. Even in border states, first-time offenders are rarely prosecuted because the court system would be inundated with millions of cases.

Q: So it's a crime to enter the country illegally, but not a crime to be here illegally. How can you do one without the other?

A: It's not hard, and millions of people have done it. People obtain legal visas to enter the U.S. for work, study or tourism and then simply remain in the coun try after the visa expires. Of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, studies show about 40 percent to 50 percent came here legally but are now illegal immigrants.
http://www.nj.com:80/morristown/index.s ... l_imm.html

Monday, Christie said that while entering the country illegally is considered a federal misdemeanor, simply lacking legal immigration status is a civil violation.

That's exactly why the visa overstays are such a problem and the very reason we should not increase the number of visa applications. The out of status illegal aliens didn't enter illegally, they just didn't leave! We need tougher penalties for overstays.

Lacking legal immigration status is a civil offense that can result in incarceration and deportation. It's not your run of the mill civil offense.

Dixie

What we need is Sensenbrenners HR4437 back and passed to make it a felony...it is time to get tough and I am sick of hearing it is not a crime....what crap if they did not come here on a visa they damn well snuck in one way or the other and should be prosecuted!!


<<RED ALERT "ACTION NEEDED 4/29">>
Battleground: North and South Carolina
Alipac'ers please take action at link below! We need S.C!!
http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-674767.html#674767

SOSADFORUS wrote:

What we need is Sensenbrenners HR4437 back and passed to make it a felony...it is time to get tough and I am sick of hearing it is not a crime....what crap if they did not come here on a visa they damn well snuck in one way or the other and should be prosecuted!!

I believe sneaking back in after being deported is a felony.

Originally Posted by MW

SOSADFORUS wrote:

What we need is Sensenbrenners HR4437 back and passed to make it a felony...it is time to get tough and I am sick of hearing it is not a crime....what crap if they did not come here on a visa they damn well snuck in one way or the other and should be prosecuted!!

I believe sneaking back in after being deported is a felony.

Yes it is MW...but it should be the first time around.

A: It's not hard, and millions of people have done it. People obtain legal visas to enter the U.S. for work, study or tourism and then simply remain in the coun try after the visa expires. Of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States, studies show about 40 percent to 50 percent came here legally but are now illegal immigrants.

THIS is what normal people with common sense call "splitting hairs."

If you overstay your visa, you fall into the "illegal presence" crowd. Why is that so hard to understand? It doesn't matter whether you physically crossed the border illegally or overstayed your visa -- the end result is the same: ILLEGAL PRESENCE. RIGHT??

Our lawmakers suck............