Skip to comments.Privacy rights upheld for illegal immigrants
Posted on 10/11/2005 12:20:25 PM PDT by Iron Matron
Judge denies media request for felons' names Elliot Jaspin - Staff Thursday, September 29, 2005
Washington --- The "privacy interests" of illegal immigrants who have been convicted of felonies in the United States would be compromised if the government released their names and other identifying information, a federal judge has ruled.
Citing court rulings and federal laws aimed at protecting individuals from unwarranted embarrassment or injury, Judge Richard Leon on Tuesday rejected a request from the Washington bureau of Cox Newspapers to release the names of illegal immigrants who are being held, or have been, in U.S. jails. These names are collected by the U.S. Justice Department as part of a program to pay state and local governments for some of the costs of incarcerating criminal immigrants.
Cox Newspapers filed suit against the Justice Department in 2003, seeking the list under the federal Freedom of Information Act after discovering that the federal government frequently neglects to deport illegal immigrants convicted of felonies after they have served their sentences.
In one case, an illegal immigrant from Mexico who had molested a 3-year-old girl in Georgia walked out of prison in 2001 after serving his sentence and disappeared because no one from the federal government was there to deport him.
In its court filings, Cox Newspapers argued that the public's right to know about convicted rapists, thieves and murderers who are in the country illegally outweighed any right to privacy they might have
Beyond asserting that criminal immigrants have a right to privacy, Leon did not explain why their privacy outweighed the public interest. "The privacy intrusion associated with disclosing this information," he wrote in his 11-page opinion, "clearly outweighs the public disclosure of the information."
Mark Tapscott, a FOIA expert with the Heritage Foundation, a conservative Washington think tank, called the decision "idiotic" and said he is confident it would be overturned on appeal. "This is a serious blow to the public's right to know," he said.
Jon Hart, the Washington attorney representing Cox Newspapers in the case, said the company has not yet decided whether it will
Thanks for your pings..
Bush would definitely get an "OWIE" if confronted by real conservatives..or anyone with a basic understanding of the Constitution.
...or maybe he does know quite a bit about the Constitution..he'd have to in order to subvert it as he does..Like "they" say, no one knows the bible better than the Devil himself.
GWB and the global elite do not want Roe to be overturned or be "quieted" by any decision from the bench. That is why we get Miers.
So this dim bulb judicial jackass, Leon, was appointed by the same president (Bush) who tells us "trust me" on the Miers nomination to the SCOTUS.
Good reminder that we don't know a hell of a lot about our new Chief Justice either.
Anyone beginning to get that slightly uncomfortable feeling?
In the old West, nothing like this would have ever happened. The citizens' quick justice GUARANTEED upholding the law!
Anger is building fast and will threaten our peace and tranquility.
He's not the only one..Ahhh I long for the good old days when citizens COULD ride anti-americans and law breakers out of town on a rail.
We were US Citizens once..now we are allowing ourselves to become a watered down version of some liberals wet dream of utopia.
Don't forget, either, the President said he "looked into Putin's soul" and believed he knew that man too; it just goes to show, we don't know what someone is really like until/unless we can see it, over a period of time. Which is why it would have been better for the President to pick someone who has proven themselves, by words and deeds, to be another Thomas or Scalia.
I believe the Roe v Wade litmus is a smokescreen only.
Not a lot has been said about Roe v Wade..until the last few years..and its been law for a Loooong time...
We need to forget individual Cases and CONCENTRATE on the CONSTITUTION..and OUR RIGHTS under it
Our activist and almost tyrannical government needs to be reigned first: Take care of the House's foundation first (Constitutional Government), then we can get the dust bunnies under the bed (Roe v Wade).
You want Unity? Unite under the DOCUMENT, The great Constitution of the United States of America!
Yep. Angry is building. JUSTIFIED anger is building.
I wonder how long before we allow this government to form some sort of "gestapo" to prevent an uprising?
It seems they are working on it as we post....
The larger question still looming over the entire mess is: Why didn't he?
Doctor Bush to the American people: "just take an aspirin and get some rest..trust me..you'll be O.K.
And some of his patients will believe..and be sorry for not having the surgery to remove the Cancer earlier...
Yep. I've got an uncomfortable feeling..but it seems this administration will not even suggest the proper curative.
We have become apathetic. The majority no longer understands right from wrong or what it REALLY means to make sacrifices for the Country.
The immigration issue may become the lynch pin issue for the Election of 2008.
This is getting curiouser and curiouser (as someone once said)...
It seems they are working on it as we post....
We simply won't let them. Too many liberal lawyers around, too many lawsuits, too many election losses, etc.
The "Gestapo" type thing took over 6 years (1933-1939) to get hold of the reins. It started by Brown-Shirts and other thugs intimidating the population which showed almost no resistance. We won't sit around and let it happen to us, Second Amendment, you know?
And the Gov. is busy working on the second ammendment now. I'm one who subscribes to "from my cold dead hands"..must it come to that?
Yes. The's the million dollar question.
Illegal Immigration directly affects the WOT..they are coming over our Southern Border. If George W. himself really supported the WOT..he'd close our borders to illegal entry..Hmmmm.
Maybe he needs our troops fighting "over there" not to keep it from these shores..but to bring it...Hmmm again.
He protects Iraq's borders and Troops move according to Iraqi Governments whims...yet will not protect our borders or listen to the American People..Hmmmm yet again.