Thread: Sup Court rules against gov in immigration I.D. theft case

Will the Supreme Court decision extend to falsifying money?

I mean, if I falsify some $20 dlls bills, those don't belong to anyone. Therefore, accoding to SCOTUS, I am not stealing anything.

Originally Posted by attorneyatlaw

sorry people this has to do with a defendant's mental state concerning the theft. If he did not know it was a person's actual number, he should not be found guilty of that charge. There is plenty of other laws he can be charged and convicted of. If you are going to demand that laws be followed, they must be followed even when they are not favorable to the cause.

attorneyatlaw,
I came into this topic expecting to rip on lawyers and judges. You've changed my mind on this issue.

After thinking it about it, I think it’s similar to intentional murder –vs- accidently killing someone. For example, if I run a red light, I’m committing a crime. If I kill someone in the crosswalk, it’s a different thing than intending to kill the person in the crosswalk. I don’t know if that makes sense to anyone else, but in my head it works out.

Don’t get me wrong, identity theft and aggravated identity theft are serious crimes, but they seem slightly different.

Perhaps the law needs to be changed to say something like "It's a felony to use any SSN that doesn't belong to you." Would that cover everything? Somehow, it'll never get passed.

By the way, there are a ton of posts on this topic at the following site:
http://politics.newsvine.com/_news/2...-case#comments

I can understand the Supreme Court ruling. May not like it, but can understand it. For example, if someone were to purchase a diamond ring from a pawn shop and the ring was later found to be stolen, should the buyer be charged as an accessory to the crime? Of course not.

Speak out now, take the five easy steps!!!

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-894218.html#894218

Originally Posted by ChiWatcher

Perhaps the law needs to be changed to say something like "It's a felony to use any SSN that doesn't belong to you."

How about, "a felony to use false federal documents"?

May 5, 1:26 PM ED

Iowa plant ex-worker wants ID theft plea withdrawn

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- A former human resources employee at an Iowa kosher slaughterhouse where hundreds of illegal immigrants were caught in a raid last year has withdrawn her guilty plea to identity theft.

Laura Althouse's attorney filed a motion Monday to withdraw the plea after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that undocumented workers who use phony IDs can't be considered identity thieves unless they knew they were using ID numbers from real people.

A judge granted Althouse's motion Tuesday, and her attorney says that effectively dismisses the charge. Althouse still faces sentencing May 13 on a charge of conspiracy to harbor undocumented immigrants for financial gain at the Agriprocessors plant in Postville.

U.S. attorney's spokesman Bob Teig declined to comment.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... SECTION=US

Justices Limit Use of Identity Theft Law in Immigration Cases



Article Tools Sponsored By
By ADAM LIPTAK and JULIA PRESTON
Published: May 4, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a favorite tool of prosecutors in immigration cases, ruling unanimously that a federal identity-theft law may not be used against many illegal workers who used false Social Security numbers to get jobs.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Supreme Court Opinion: Flores-Figueroa v. United StatesInteractive
Supreme Court Opinion: Flores-Figueroa v. United States

The question in the case was whether workers who use fake identification numbers to commit some other crimes must know they belong to a real person to be subject to a two-year sentence extension for “aggravated identity theft.â€

Originally Posted by attorneyatlaw

sorry people this has to do with a defendant's mental state concerning the theft. If he did not know it was a person's actual number, he should not be found guilty of that charge.

What does "a defendant's mental state" have to do with anything? Theft is theft, whether he knew it was a theft from an individual or only a theft from law-abiding taxpayers as a whole.

Mr. Attorney at Law, where do you park your car during the day?

And would a teenager with a tire iron and a piece of electrical wire know whether it was an abandoned car or it actually "belonged to someone?"

May I suggest that you use a steering wheel lock, such as "The Club," and a brake pedal lock, from now on. You can no longer claim, neither to your insurance company nor to the judge, that you did not know beforehand that a young joy rider would claim that he thought it was an abandoned vehicle. They just might rule that you had in effect abandoned your car, if only overnight, and that you are therefore not entitled to an insurance payout or restitution for damages.

Good luck in court on proving, beyond any reasonable doubt, that future defendant's mental state at the time when he will have stolen your car. Keep in mind that the "thought crimes bill," H.R. 1913, has passed neither the Senate nor Mr. Obama, at least not yet.

Point taken--if you are an American it is assumed you are guilty and ignorance of the law is no excuse. There should be thousands of people outsied the court house protesting the incarceration and the liberal mindset that resulted in the gun owner being convicted and sent to jail.

Attorneyat law--I unsderstand your point re: the levels of guilt versus the crime--nonetheless--I do not believe there are any people buying these SSNs who do not realize that it is a crime and that they may belong to others. They cross our borders knowing they are committing a violation and they know in advance that they have to get a SS card to open work opportunities nto them. It is all BS. It is the fact that lawyers arfgue the niceties of law rather than the law. They are well schooled when thye get here.
The law sir, is an arse!! Explain the KELO decision, if you can. A flagrant violation of the right of eminent domain. This is what has happened in our litigious society. Stealing and violating rights are interpreted today by lawyers in favor of businessmen. That's where the money is.

Supreme Court ruling won't affect Utah immigration laws

Identity theft » Utah focusing on those who sell forged papers, not those who hold them.

By Sheena Mcfarland
The Salt Lake Tribune
Updated: 05/05/2009 07:38:12 PM MDT

Federal law enforcement officials say they will continue enforcing immigration laws in the same way despite a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

The court ruled that undocumented immigrants who have false papers may be charged with aggravated identity theft only if they know they are stealing the identity of an actual person.

Judges and attorneys have operated under that idea for the last couple of years, including the raids of the Swift & Co. meatpacking plant in Hyrum, said U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman. During the raids, Utah was one of the only states that did not go after immigrants who had false documents, but rather focused on the people who were selling the forged papers, he said.

“Some of it comes as a result of our district judges being up on top of this issue. That level of criminal intent needs to be there,â€