Skip to main content

View Diary: Immigrants Like Me (118 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Being paid in straw, Counselor? You seem to have (0+ / 0-)

    a bit of a surplus.... :)

    The first half of your comment implies that people who support immigrants, like myself, are somehow tied in with the torturers of the Bush administration, because we disrespect the rule of law.

    I don't know where you got that!  My point was that we don't have a rule of law in America, and the legal community bears responsibility for allowing matters to degenerate to that point.

    As for "supporting immigrants," I draw a principled distinction between those who are here legally, and those who are not.  In rough effect, every illegal immigrant takes the place of a legal one; mercy to the illegal is gross injustice to the one who would be able to come here legally. It's disingenuous for you to not acknowledge that distinction.

    The rest of your comment is just blustering nonsense.  The idea that "the law is what it is, and your clients didn't have to break it" is just mind-bogglingly naive. U.S. immigration law is really fantastically complicated.

    So is the Internal Revenue Code.  But it seems to me that when Jorge W. Arbusto wades across the border to Laredo and goes looking for work, five will get you ten that he is in violation of our immigration laws.

    As to "ALJs" that term is not used in immigration law.  There are many, many different kinds of immigration tribunal.

    As all immigration law is federal, they are either Article III judges, or they are not.  And, unless you are taking a case up on appeal, they are probably not Article III judges.

    Your belief that federal judges are all very fair-minded and professional is very quaint and charming and 100 percent the opposite of the truth. Some of the judges are great, but some are scum.

    Oh never mind. You just have a cartoon version of law.

    Reading comprehension is essential for a lawyer.  If all federal judges were very fair-minded and professional, I wouldn't be able to complain that we don't have a rule of law, now would I?

    You don't see too many off-the-wall decisions in Tax Court cases.  If you had a complex question and the law was on your side, you usually went to Tax Court. My experience is that ALJs are better than district court judges like this guy, who was known for throwing out cases he simply didn't want to hear. Knowing the ALJs I do, I've always seen them as a better breed of cat -- experts in their field, and remarkably disinterested in any one of the steady stream of cases that flew past their desk.

    Of course, after eight years of Bu$h, all bets are probably off.

    •  Jesus said not to throw (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kefauver, Sentido

      pearls before swine. In this current age, people say not to feed trolls. I'm done with you after this post. I've responded way too much, because I've been irrationally hoping to spark a little light of understanding in your mind--with the greater aim of doing a little bit to squelch some nativist lies.

      But you're not responding intelligently to any of my points. Instead, you just keep emitting great clouds of nonsense.  Viz. your penultimate paragraph about tax court.

      Are you having a few pops at the moment, by the by, just out of curiosity?

      Good luck. By the way, I'm not angry at you. I recognize that you're putting a lot of energy into trying to defend an indefensible position.

      But perhaps you'd be more welcome if you'd reflect more Democratic views.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site