Thread: Wake County Sheriff: Manpower Lacking To Track Illegal Immig

WRAL ran this story yesterday:
http://www.wral.com/news/4857586/detail.htmlhttp://<br /> <br /> Wake County S...<br /> <br />

I think the hold up is in what happens after an illegal immigrant is arrested if the ICE does not want to pick them up. Local law enforcement is without recourse and has to let them go.

Even when they are caught, they are usually released with an immigration hearing date and NO bond. Meaning: "Ya'all run away now ya hear and don't let us catch you again". To the best of my knowledge warrants are not issued when they fail to show up at an immigration hearing. Kinda makes the system a real joke doesn't it?

Dident one of the immigration acts empower all US LEO's to enforce the immigration law?

If this is not the case, does anyone have a list of the agencies whose officers were given special powers by the BICE or former INS?

Immigration and National Security
Printer-Friendly Version
Send this article to a friend!


A number of aspects of immigration law debated in recent years are ones that relate directly to our country’s homeland security and its ability to deter foreign terrorism on our soil.
In-Country Adjustment of Status for Illegal Aliens [Section 245(i)]

There are circumstances under which a nonimmigrant or an illegal alien is allowed to become a legal permanent resident alien (for example, through marriage to a U.S. citizen). Historically, in such cases, when aliens petitioning to “adjust� their status to legal residency were not legally present in the U.S., they had to return to their home country to be interviewed and investigated by U.S. consular personnel, just as other applicants for legal immigration are.

But a provision of the immigration law enacted in 1994 has allowed these applicants to remain in the U.S. and skip the background check, just by paying a fine. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) has supported this end-run around regular security procedures, because it generates revenue for them in fines--as much as $1.4 billion in the last eight years. Section 245(i) was supposed to have expired in 1997. But Congress has repeatedly extended the deadline for filing.

By allowing illegal aliens to adjust status without going through proper background checks, Section 245(i) completely short-circuits national security against foreign criminals and terrorists. Fortunately, after being extended by Congress, Section 245(i) is, for the moment, expired. But there are provisions in pending bills that would restore it permanently.

Monitoring Foreign Students (CIPRIS)

At any point in time, there are roughly 500,000 foreign students studying in America. In recent years, the FBI has warned Congress that state sponsors of terrorism have been funding students to come to the U.S., where most are studying technology-related fields that contribute to foreign weapons programs. One of the September 11 hijackers was admitted to the U.S. as a foreign student; he never showed up at the school, and the college did not report that fact to the INS.

A computerized system to track foreign students was designed in 1997 (the Coordinated Interagency Partnership Regarding International Students, or CIPRIS), but due to intense lobbying by colleges, it was never implemented beyond the pilot program stage.

After September 11, Congress again required that an automated system to maintain information on foreign students be implemented. The Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) will track immigration status changes, changes of address, changes in program of study, and other details. While SEVIS holds the potential to be significantly more effective than the INS's previous, paper-based foreign student monitoring system, it will only be useful if the INS acts on the data being entered into it.

Entry-Exit Controls

Every year, millions of foreigners enter the U.S. as "nonimmigrants" (visitors or workers of some type) for a limited period. Although they are expected to return home at the end of their visit, there is no effective means for detecting those who do not. In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, or IRAIRA, with a provision (Section 110) requiring the INS to set up a database to track this information within two years. But, due to objections from the tourism industry and others, full implementation was delayed.

After the terrorist attacks, Congress again mandated the implementation of a computerized entry-exit database by 2005. This database will collect records on arriving foreign visitors and match them with departure records. However, it exempts Canadian citizens, who will not be required to provide passports or visas in order to gain entry to the U.S.-providing an easy loophole for terrorists to exploit.

Without exit-entry controls, the U.S. has no way of noticing whether a nonimmigrant overstays his visa in violation of immigration law. In the absence of such a system, enemies of our national security can more easily enter the U.S. as nonimmigrants and remain to threaten us from within. It is appears that most of the September 11 hijackers entered as nonimmigrants and then overstayed their visas undetected.

Driver's Licenses

There is a movement in some states to ease up on proof-of-identity requirements for driver's license applicants. Proponents admit that the reason is to make it easier for illegal aliens to get driver's licenses, which, they claim, will make the roads safer.

But in every state, the driver's license (and its counterpart, the state ID card) is the primary document used to establish identity and proof of legal residence. Making driver's licenses accessible to illegal aliens gives them the means to pass themselves off as legal residents of the United States. All of the 19 hijackers in the September 11 attack had one or more state driver's licenses, which masked the illegality of their presence in the U.S.
Local Police Cooperation (Section 133)

In order for American law enforcement to work together toward national security, state and local authorities must be able to work with the federal government to detect and detain foreigners who are either dangerous or are in our country illegally. For example, several of the September terrorists had been stopped by local police for driving infractions. But because the officers did not have access to the Immigration and Naturalization Service's "watch list" for terrorists, they were not detained.

At present, local police can hold an illegal alien for being illegal only if local law gives them that authority. In the 1996 IIRAIRA law, Congress included a provision (Section 133) that empowers the Immigration and Naturalization Service to provide training to local law enforcement agencies, who would then gain authority to detain suspected illegal aliens. But INS and its parent, the Department of Justice (DOJ), have taken no action to inform local jurisdictions about the option or to encourage them to do so. The thousands of police officers nationwide are potentially powerfully allies in the fight against foreign terrorism on our soil, but the DOJ and INS have wasted that potential.

Classified Evidence

In some immigration trials, the prosecution has to use classified evidence, gathered through our nation's intelligence network, to prove that the alien in question should be removed or is a danger to the United States.

To reveal this information to anyone but the officers of the court would threaten national security. But the lawyers for illegal aliens have turned this necessity on its head, calling secret evidence a violation of their clients' rights. They seek to forbid the introduction of classified information into a case as evidence unless it is disclosed to them and to the public. Some members of Congress are trying to enact a prohibition on the use of classified evidence.

If the September 11 attacks have shown us anything, it's that America's intelligence network is more important than ever in defending our country against terrorism. Its integrity and our need for national security far outweigh the cynical demands of lawyers for full disclosure at any cost.

Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

Led by Mexico's President Vicente Fox, efforts are underway to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens in the United States. Normally, before legal immigrants are admitted to our country, U.S. consular officials abroad can check to see whether applicants have criminal records or other background issues in their home country. Illegal aliens, of course, do not undergo such a procedure. Giving amnesty allows millions of illegal aliens to sidestep this important means of screening out people who pose a threat to our national security.

Updated 10/02

Also look at this web site
http://www.closeup.org/immigrat.htm