MOCO paying illegals layers with our taxes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a democrat but I am strongly against my tax dollars spent on this.

Yup. But it’s been going on for YEARS without people noticing. Doesn’t anyone else wonder why we’re paying so much in taxes and development is all around us, but the infrastructure, school quality and amenities don’t match up in the least?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's happening is that the liberal policies in Maryland are so completely crazy that they are driving "less crazy" liberals here to Virginia, and they are bringing their liberal policies with them. We now have big pockets of illegal immigrants just a couple of miles away, with related gang activity and assaults. At the same time, we have schools, now rated at 3 and 4, where half the kids don't even speak English. We are spending a fortune to build a large and expensive new homeless shelter, three times as fancy as my college dorm, next to a library. People are arguing that subsidized housing residents shouldn't be forced to live in units smaller than educated professionals enjoy (and pay for) themselves.

Virginia has gone downhill in the 20 years I've lived here, and it's due to the influx of liberals from Maryland. (And some are delusion. The woman waiting in line at the voting booth said we should just give every American $500, and that would solve a lot of problems.)

Everything always Maryland’s fault.

I guess it is...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's happening is that the liberal policies in Maryland are so completely crazy that they are driving "less crazy" liberals here to Virginia, and they are bringing their liberal policies with them. We now have big pockets of illegal immigrants just a couple of miles away, with related gang activity and assaults. At the same time, we have schools, now rated at 3 and 4, where half the kids don't even speak English. We are spending a fortune to build a large and expensive new homeless shelter, three times as fancy as my college dorm, next to a library. People are arguing that subsidized housing residents shouldn't be forced to live in units smaller than educated professionals enjoy (and pay for) themselves.

Virginia has gone downhill in the 20 years I've lived here, and it's due to the influx of liberals from Maryland. (And some are delusion. The woman waiting in line at the voting booth said we should just give every American $500, and that would solve a lot of problems.)

We have no pockets of illegal immigrants. We have pockets of hispanics, which include legal and undocumented and even US citizens born here.

Yes we have schools with lots of kids who don't yet speak English. As NYC had when my great grandparents arrived.

Which homeless shelter? What jurisdiction are you in?

You are conflating committed affordable housing with a homeless shelter. Not sure why.

Virginia is doing just fine.

A universal basic income is unlikely to pass in Va, but its actually quite a serious policy idea, though I doubt you have done any research on it.

It is NOT the same thing. We now have strict laws to follow and visas to obtain and abide by and if you have violated the terms of your visa or our laws you should not be here. Hispanic people are wonderful but you need to be here legally as it is hurting everyone including other people here legally from different countries.
I have many friends here on various visas who would never dream of violating those terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who support this, do you realize there are American citizens in jail who have not yet been convicted of any crime but who are their for the want of a lawyer? So if you are keen on providing lawyers for people who cannot afford them why don't we start with our own citizens.

Yes I do.

They should receive a speedy process as well. It's not one or another.

Also if we stopped jailing people for civil violations, like being undocumented, and put our effort toward criminals we can hand them over to the federal agents and save the money. We would have more money toward due process for citizens.

It is "one or another" when you have finite resources, which, as adults with life experience, we should all know is the case. In any case, so many wants and needs of our society need to take precedence over helping illegal immigrants stay in this country.

Agree that instead of "jailing" illegal immigrants, we should instead speedily deport them.

You deport them without due process of law?

What if ICE decides to deport you?

They can deport me back to my own country, sure, I would expect any country that I have over stayed in to do that.
Also - have you been to any of these countries, PP? Because unless we are talking about parts of Syria many people are managing to live reasonable lives in other countries. Getting deported to your own country is not unreasonable.

And how many Syrians are we taking in here? It seems like not very many because we have too many people running into the country and then being supported by a CASA lobbying group. That’s messed up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's happening is that the liberal policies in Maryland are so completely crazy that they are driving "less crazy" liberals here to Virginia, and they are bringing their liberal policies with them. We now have big pockets of illegal immigrants just a couple of miles away, with related gang activity and assaults. At the same time, we have schools, now rated at 3 and 4, where half the kids don't even speak English. We are spending a fortune to build a large and expensive new homeless shelter, three times as fancy as my college dorm, next to a library. People are arguing that subsidized housing residents shouldn't be forced to live in units smaller than educated professionals enjoy (and pay for) themselves.

Virginia has gone downhill in the 20 years I've lived here, and it's due to the influx of liberals from Maryland. (And some are delusion. The woman waiting in line at the voting booth said we should just give every American $500, and that would solve a lot of problems.)

We have no pockets of illegal immigrants. We have pockets of hispanics, which include legal and undocumented and even US citizens born here.

Yes we have schools with lots of kids who don't yet speak English. As NYC had when my great grandparents arrived.

Which homeless shelter? What jurisdiction are you in?

You are conflating committed affordable housing with a homeless shelter. Not sure why.

Virginia is doing just fine.

A universal basic income is unlikely to pass in Va, but its actually quite a serious policy idea, though I doubt you have done any research on it.

- 10000

"Undocumented immigrants" = illegal immigrants. Fixed that for you.

I have a postulation: The majority of non-english speaking students are illegal immigrants or children of illegal immigrants. It stands to reason that legal immigrants and citizens, hispanic or not, are much more likely to be capable of speaking english. If you disagree, provide proof. Let the government do an investigation of the non-english speaking kids and check their citizenship. No? What are you afraid of, Liberal?

Some school districts in northern VA are flooded with these kids. They can't pass the SOLs. They drag down our school scores (and property values). Our tax dollars are being spent on them, our property taxes are going up this year yet again. I can't send my kid to our public school because I'm not sure that they would pay enough attention to her needs.

There is, of course, the crimes. Huge amounts of litter alongside the roads. JBG or whatever that company's called that runs the slums of Culmore, where multiple families live packed into a single unit zoned for 1 family, which causes over-crowding at our schools.

It's unsustainable and spreading. You "far left" liberals are out of your mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. I don't see the Constitution giving criminal illegal immigrants the right to representation. That's a right given to citizens.

How do you know they are illegal if they aren't given a fair hearing?

BTW, here is the 6th amendment to the US constitution

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

It says the accused. Nowhere does it mention citizenship. If there is any rationale for denying this right in an immigration proceeding, it is the argument that such proceeding is NOT a criminal prosecution, but a civil matter.

But that would seem to contradict the idea that all illegal immigrants are ipso facto criminals.

This is a federal question, immigration proceedings are federal proceedings, and you just quoted the US Constitution, not the Maryland Constitution. Whether detainees have a right to representation in a federal immigration proceeding is irrelevant - if they do, then it is the US government's responsibility to pick up the tab. But nowhere is there a constitutional right to have an attorney in a federal proceeding provided by and paid for with county funds. That's ridiculous.

As one of those high income Montgomery County taxpayers - I can't move right now. But there's a pretty good chance once my kids finish school we're out. And that isn't so far away.

I am quite sure SCOTUS reads the 6th amendment as applying to the states, based on the 14th amendment.

Yes. And? This is not a situation where a state has been ordered to provide representation. This is a county (not a state) voluntarily providing representation to detainees facing deportation. Not because they have to, because they want to.

and the REASON for that, in the article linked to by OP is Being in the country illegally is a civil — not criminal — violation, so those arrested are not entitled to public defenders if they can’t afford a lawyer of their own.

They are not entitled to a lawyer BECAUSE they are NOT criminals. Get it? Not criminals. Its a civil proceeding. IF they were accused of a crime, THEN they WOULD be entitled to a lawyer - paid by the govt.

So yeah, MoCo is paying for lawyers for undocumented immigrants. Not for criminals.

And let's be clear and honest here. None of these lawyers are out to seek the well-being of US citizens and our country. They are fighting tooth and nail to keep illegal immigrants here on US soil. Unacceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The citizens of Montgomery County WANT this. Do you get that?

This is what they WANT. They voted for the council members who approve this stuff, and no one is being recalled for it. Ergo, this meets with the approval of most residents of Montgomery County.

Accept it.

No. This wrong, it's bad for the people, and the sooner we get this message out, the better. Enough of you crazy extremists.

These aren't crazy extremists who are electing the council and county executive, these are ordinary mainstream democrats.

Are you suggesting that mainstream democrats are crazy and extreme?

[Anonymous]

Can this thread get back on track? I'd agree with Krasnow. We are voting for her or any person who seems moderately Republican.

[Anonymous]

Can we get a list of people who are supporting this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Those of you who support this, do you realize there are American citizens in jail who have not yet been convicted of any crime but who are their for the want of a lawyer? So if you are keen on providing lawyers for people who cannot afford them why don't we start with our own citizens.

I'm a public interest lawyer, so I understand what you are saying---and yes, you are correct that citizens languish in lock up for rather innocuous charges. But, I also understand the reasoning behind funding immigration lawyers in MoCo---a county with a high volume of American born children with undocumented parents. In short: our county is more stable and far safer when these families remain intact. Just look at the Latino gang issues we have in our county: they are connected to lack of family stability (more directly: youth without parental supervision).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. I don't see the Constitution giving criminal illegal immigrants the right to representation. That's a right given to citizens.

How do you know they are illegal if they aren't given a fair hearing?

BTW, here is the 6th amendment to the US constitution

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

It says the accused. Nowhere does it mention citizenship. If there is any rationale for denying this right in an immigration proceeding, it is the argument that such proceeding is NOT a criminal prosecution, but a civil matter.

But that would seem to contradict the idea that all illegal immigrants are ipso facto criminals.

This is a federal question, immigration proceedings are federal proceedings, and you just quoted the US Constitution, not the Maryland Constitution. Whether detainees have a right to representation in a federal immigration proceeding is irrelevant - if they do, then it is the US government's responsibility to pick up the tab. But nowhere is there a constitutional right to have an attorney in a federal proceeding provided by and paid for with county funds. That's ridiculous.

As one of those high income Montgomery County taxpayers - I can't move right now. But there's a pretty good chance once my kids finish school we're out. And that isn't so far away.

I am quite sure SCOTUS reads the 6th amendment as applying to the states, based on the 14th amendment.

Yes. And? This is not a situation where a state has been ordered to provide representation. This is a county (not a state) voluntarily providing representation to detainees facing deportation. Not because they have to, because they want to.

and the REASON for that, in the article linked to by OP is Being in the country illegally is a civil — not criminal — violation, so those arrested are not entitled to public defenders if they can’t afford a lawyer of their own.

They are not entitled to a lawyer BECAUSE they are NOT criminals. Get it? Not criminals. Its a civil proceeding. IF they were accused of a crime, THEN they WOULD be entitled to a lawyer - paid by the govt.

So yeah, MoCo is paying for lawyers for undocumented immigrants. Not for criminals.

And let's be clear and honest here. None of these lawyers are out to seek the well-being of US citizens and our country. They are fighting tooth and nail to keep illegal immigrants here on US soil. Unacceptable.

What? How many immigration attorneys do you know IRL? I know tons, and they are public interest lawyers who absolutely care about civil Gideon and access to justice for all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed. I don't see the Constitution giving criminal illegal immigrants the right to representation. That's a right given to citizens.

How do you know they are illegal if they aren't given a fair hearing?

BTW, here is the 6th amendment to the US constitution

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

It says the accused. Nowhere does it mention citizenship. If there is any rationale for denying this right in an immigration proceeding, it is the argument that such proceeding is NOT a criminal prosecution, but a civil matter.

But that would seem to contradict the idea that all illegal immigrants are ipso facto criminals.

This is a federal question, immigration proceedings are federal proceedings, and you just quoted the US Constitution, not the Maryland Constitution. Whether detainees have a right to representation in a federal immigration proceeding is irrelevant - if they do, then it is the US government's responsibility to pick up the tab. But nowhere is there a constitutional right to have an attorney in a federal proceeding provided by and paid for with county funds. That's ridiculous.

As one of those high income Montgomery County taxpayers - I can't move right now. But there's a pretty good chance once my kids finish school we're out. And that isn't so far away.

I am quite sure SCOTUS reads the 6th amendment as applying to the states, based on the 14th amendment.

Yes. And? This is not a situation where a state has been ordered to provide representation. This is a county (not a state) voluntarily providing representation to detainees facing deportation. Not because they have to, because they want to.

and the REASON for that, in the article linked to by OP is Being in the country illegally is a civil — not criminal — violation, so those arrested are not entitled to public defenders if they can’t afford a lawyer of their own.

They are not entitled to a lawyer BECAUSE they are NOT criminals. Get it? Not criminals. Its a civil proceeding. IF they were accused of a crime, THEN they WOULD be entitled to a lawyer - paid by the govt.

So yeah, MoCo is paying for lawyers for undocumented immigrants. Not for criminals.

And let's be clear and honest here. None of these lawyers are out to seek the well-being of US citizens and our country. They are fighting tooth and nail to keep illegal immigrants here on US soil. Unacceptable.

What? How many immigration attorneys do you know IRL? I know tons, and they are public interest lawyers who absolutely care about civil Gideon and access to justice for all.

If these lawyers cared, they would represent pro bono. Let's be honest. All this 'outrage' in support of legal representation for illegal immigrants is about using public funds to pay lawyers. The same with colleges/universities... they are fighting for illegal immigrants so they can get the tuition from them.

[Anonymous]

Many illegals pay taxes, remember.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:




Many illegals pay taxes, remember.

No they don't.

They are paid cash under the table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:




Many illegals pay taxes, remember.

So do citizens yet every citizen does not get legal services paid for on civil matters. Setting aside that these people are here illegally in the first place and shouldn't get anything for free