What we really need is an idiot judge crackdown

Judge blocks U.S. illegal worker crackdown

A U.S. federal court judge on Wednesday blocked a key part of the Bush administration’s stepped-up efforts to crack down on illegal immigrant workers and those who employ them.

Judge Charles Breyer of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted a preliminary injunction against a program that would force employers to verify Social Security numbers and fire workers whose numbers did not match official records.

This judge thinks that forcing employers to verify SSNs and holding them to 90 days to either get the error corrected or fire the worker is unfair to all workers.

The ACLU, the AFL-CIO, and other labor groups brought the lawsuit challenging the law.

Breyer had already blocked the Social Security Administration from sending out 140,000 letters to employers with 8 million employees whose names did not match their nine-digit identification numbers.

Lovely groups

So we’ve got a list of potential problems (of all sorts) that this judge has prevented from being checked.

I’ve always felt that two main strategies need to be implemented before any real reform of the illegal immigration problem can begin. We must a) Secure the border and b) Go hard after employers who hire illegal aliens.

These aren’t ground-breaking ideas, here. They’re simply enforcement of existing law and plain common sense.

(via Wizbang)


  1. I don’t think you need those things BEFORE you can expand the guest worker program to meet our needs. Right now, like it or not, we NEED an expansive guest worker program. Even with the very limited enforcement we see today, there are crops sitting in the field rotting in some places, because that enforcement is working, even if to a limited degree. Those rotting crops are wasted resources of this country, and we end up buying imported food, exporting our currency, never to see it again. Until our country suppies all the workers for these very low wage jobs, we need these workers, they just all need to documented up one side and down the other. Oh, and no, it’s not a path to citizenship. That’s just STUPID. It’s a job, nothing else. Don’t want it without citizenship? Someone else will. When the job’s done, go home.

  2. KTLA: I’m not arguing against legal workers of any kind. In fact, I believe that increased numbers of legal temporary immigrant workers, if managed well (a large stretch, admittedly), will help lessen the demand for illegal workers and will help many employers decide to stay legal.

  3. I have had to be fingerprinted, investigated by state agencies, photographed, made to pay hundreds of dollars, and questioned by local authorities in order to exercise one of my constitutional rights. MO readers know which one. To date, the ACLU has not offered to help.

  4. Murdoc, many of the people who want to enter the U.S. legally in order to work, cannot do so simply because it takes years and thousands of dollars just to apply. Until that changes we still see many illegal immigrants. Additioanlly, social security was originally prohibited from being used as a national ID number. We seem to be tip-toeing into Stasi-America thanks to initiatives like these. No thankyou; I’d rather put up with the multitudes of harmless hardworking illegal immigrants.

  5. Yes, my point was that we do not have to wait to get the necessary expanded guest worker program in place until we’ve got the border security and employers licked. In fact, BOTH of those wll be easier to tackle if a large number of illegal workers start coming in legally, something they can’t do now. Since my politicians don’t seem to get this, I’ll reiterate again. There is *NO* reason to give any kind of ‘path to citizenship’ to these guest workers. A path already exists, they can get in that line. If we want ’em, we’ll take ’em.

  6. GL I have been investigated at least eight times by Federal, State, local and Foreign police and intelligence agencies. Was required to provide a bio that included SSN, family personal data, medical data, fingerprints and provided said agencies permission to investigate and spy on me. Every person that joins the armed forces sign that paperwork at least once (in four places). It is part of the enlistment package.

  7. DJ, Oh yeah. Then I got the additional layer of scrutiny when DIS went out and questioned my friends and family. The difference though is that we volunteered when we enlisted. Well, unless you were drafted… On the other hand, we don’t choose whether we have rights or not- they’re ours by birthright. And no gubmint organization ought to be able to decide for me which ones I can have and which I can’t, or deem me worthy of exercising my rights after jumping legal hurdles and paying $$ to do so. Which is why I’ll never fathom why the ACLU will not lift a finger to help gun owners in CA or MA, say, but will do a full court press if the town common in F*ckbuckle, AR puts up a Nativity scene at Christmas. Or, more to the original point, someone tries to enforce immigration law.

  8. Someone I know likes to say that he thinks the identification requirements and permits should be the same for voting and gun ownership.

  9. How about a ‘three strikes and you’re out’ law for judges. Have three rulings overturned and you’re out of office on the premise that you don’t know the law.