Posted on 11/10/2008 9:39:40 PM PST by WaveMan
Arizona’s Supreme Court chief justice has agreed to enforce the Hispanic Bar Association’s demands of banning the terms “illegal” and “aliens” in all of the state’s courtrooms.
Claiming that the terms are inflammatory, the president of Arizona’s Hispanic Bar Association, (known as Los Abogados) has asked state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ruth McGregor to stop using them at trials or hearings because they create perceptions of judicial bias.
In a strongly worded letter to the chief justice, Los Abogados’ president says attaching an illegal status to a person establishes a brand of contemptibility, creates the appearance of anti-immigrant prejudice and tarnishes the image of courts as a place where disputes may be fairly resolved.
It further points out that no human being is illegal and that a national Hispanic journalism association has roundly criticized the reference for dehumanizing a segment of the population. The letter goes on to criticize the state’s High Court for using the term “illegals” in at least two opinions and the term “illegal aliens” in dozens of others.
It concludes with a list of acceptable and unacceptable terms relating to illegal immigration. Among those the group wants banned are; immigration crisis, immigration epidemic, open borders advocates, anchor babies and invaders. Among the acceptable terms are foreign nationals, unauthorized workers and human rights advocates. Click here to see the entire list as well as Chief Justice McGregor’s promise to enforce the requests.
(Excerpt) Read more at judicialwatch.org ...
Yeah! Let’s go back to what we used to call ‘em. Wetbacks!
LOL....
This country is going insane...
Do Arizona elect their judges? Or they’re appointed by politicians?
I wonder when are they going to call a rapist an ‘uninvited love-maker”??
Lest non-Hispanics become victims of discrimination, it’s only fair that words like criminal, perpetrator and convict be banned from court.
Hmmm... Double-plus ungood!
“...attaching an illegal status to a person establishes a brand of contemptibility,”
Really?
Wow, I’m glad the majority of Americans differ with that guys stupid opinion. I just hope that the black robes see what they’re doing to this nation and take notice.
Lets replace both words with “Criminales”
Just call ‘em guilty.
Well if that measure comes to my state, I will be one of those attorneys held in contempt and will appeal as far as the law allows. Illegal alien is someone who has no regard for our law. Immigrants are those who come into the country legally and have regard for our law. Immigrants are welcome, illegal aliens are not.
“rachel” had the best comment:
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Justices: Sims, Raye and Hull, said in a decision:
“Defendants prefer the term “undocumented immigrants.” However,
defendants do not cite any authoritative definition of the term
and do not support their assertion that the terms “undocumented
immigrant” and “illegal alien” are interchangeable. We consider
the term “illegal alien” less ambiguous. Thus, under federal
law, an “alien” is “any person not a citizen or national of the
United States.” (8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(3).) A “national of the
United States” means a U.S. citizen or a noncitizen who owes
permanent allegiance to the United States. (8 U.S.C. §
1101(a)(22).) Under federal law, “immigrant” means every alien
except those classified by federal law as nonimmigrant aliens.
(8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15).) “Nonimmigrant aliens” are, in
general, temporary visitors to the United States, such as
diplomats and students who have no intention of abandoning their
residence in a foreign country. (8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(F),
(G); Elkins v. Moreno (1978) 435 U.S. 647, 664-665 [55 L.Ed.2d
614, 627-628] [under pre-1996 law, held the question whether
nonimmigrant aliens could become domiciliaries of Maryland for
purposes of in-state college tuition was a matter of state
law].) The federal statutes at issue in this appeal refer to
“alien[s] who [are] not lawfully present in the United States.”
(8 U.S.C. §§ 1621(d), 1623.) In place of the cumbersome phrase
“alien[s] who [are] not lawfully present,” we shall use the term
“illegal aliens.” “
* reply
Fri, 11/07/2008 - 01:40 — Rachel (not verified)
****
Love smart chicks.
LOL! Works for me!
illegal alien...illegal alien...illegal alien...
Now ban that....judge
What is wrong with people. Illegal=unlawful, violates the law
Alien=unnaturalized, foreign.
This judge just wants to ban the truth and the illegality of these people’s status.
Here’s an idea: How about we just deport the judge and his family instead?
Call ‘em what they are....CRIMINAL INVADERS.
Well that makes sense, since there are no laws in this country anymore. If the highest courts in this country's states and federal jurisdictions refuse to apply and enforce the law in regards to something as vital as the presidency requiring those applying for the job to produce irrefutable proof of citizenship, then they do not have the authority to apply and enforce the laws of the land on anyone else.
NOTHING is illegal anymore.
I don't get why "alien" is included. They are out there, watching, waiting....
I suspect the flow of wetbacks will come to a stop before long, and perhaps a reversal of the trend will begin to take place as our economic situation worsens, and the number of unemployed continues to grow into the double digits.
Soon those "Job stealers from Mexico" will be chased off the job, and states facing massive budget shortfalls will be chasing them out of their states.
Fine! ‘Enemy combatants’ it is.
PING.
The term, “illegal alien”, is used extensively in Federal statutes. Can’t imagine how the State of Arizona thinks it can get away with abolishing Federal nomenclature.
You can’t say the word “illegal” in a courtroom? I find this a little hard to believe. And what about the term “legal alien”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.