Handpicked Bush judge crosses line in overturning immigrant proposition

Posted: Dec 21, 2004 12:00 AM

An activist judge strikes again! David C. Bury of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the will of the people and enjoined enforcement of Arizona's Proposition 200, which would require Arizonans to provide proof of citizenship in order to register to vote and require valid identification when applying for state benefits.

It's clear that Prop 200 represents the people's demand that their government enforce laws against illegal immigrants. It passed with 56 percent of the vote even though it was opposed by public officials of both parties, the Chamber of Commerce, big labor and the Catholic bishops.

Even 47 percent of Arizona Hispanics voted in favor of Prop 200. Immigrants who had stood in long lines to come here legally see no reason to allow their tax dollars to go to the 4,000 immigrants who illegally cross Arizona's border every night.

Bury was appointed by President George W. Bush. That prompts the question: Has a Bush judge already turned into a supremacist judge who ignores the will of the people in favor of his own, or Bush's, policy preferences?

Bush's plan to give illegal immigrants guest-worker status, which forgoes punishment for their violations of immigration law and therefore meets the definition of amnesty, was shot down by Congress earlier this year. Yet on Nov. 2 Bush went to Santiago, Chile, and insulted many who voted for him by announcing he would expend the "political capital" earned in his re-election to grant guest-worker status to millions of illegal immigrants.

Two dozen congressmen wrote a letter to the president opposing his plan, primarily for national security reasons. Bush brushed them off with elitist disdain. "I get letters all the time from people who are trying to steer me one way or the other," he said; "I'm going to move forward."

Bush made his commitment during a half-hour meeting with Mexican President Vicente Fox. Bush said, "I made it very clear my position that we need to make sure that where there's a willing worker and a willing employer, that that job ought to be filled legally in cases where Americans will not fill that job."

With Bush's mantra, repeated ad nauseam, it's no wonder that former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik didn't think it important to reveal to the White House vetting process that he was a "willing employer" who employed a housekeeper/nanny who was an immigrant "willing worker" illegally living in the United States. Of course, he wasn't paying Social Security taxes for her. Kerik subsequently removed himself from consideration as the new head of the Homeland Security Department.

Maybe he expected the president's attitude to be: "No problem, Kerik. Since the nanny has a job, I'll just give her a guest-worker permit, and in three years she can get it renewed and then have permanent residency."

When Bush speaks of a "willing employer" and a "willing worker," he never talks about the wage the employer is willing to pay or the wage the worker is willing to accept. There are billions of non-Americans who are willing to work for Third World wages and, as the Bernard Kerik case proves. There are U.S. multimillionaires who would rather enjoy the cheap labor provided by illegal immigrants than pay the wages Americans expect.

The way Bush steamrollered the intelligence bill through Congress in December 2004, demanding that the House abandon its sensible provisions for border security, indicates that he might be willing to split the Republican Party in order to carry out his promise to Fox.
Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., emerged as a hero from the legislative battle because he fought to include strong border security and a prohibition against granting drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants, finally saying that the failure to include this "will keep Americans unnecessarily at risk."

It was dishonest of the media and the pro-open-borders senators to try to pit Sensenbrenner against the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations. In fact, the commission's final report came out strongly in favor of clamping down on border security and drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants.

The commission report said: "It is elemental to border security to know who is coming into the country. ... At many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists."

Even though the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers' drivers' licenses enabled them to travel freely throughout America like U.S. citizens with easy access to vehicles and buildings, all the time concealing their terrorist designs, the senators and the White House irrationally maintained that drivers' licenses should be available to illegal immigrants. Since Rep. Sensenbrenner's courageous stand forced these issues onto the national news, we hope Congress will deal with the problem of illegal immigrants in January 2005.