High court to hear immigrant ID theft case
WASHINGTON (AP) — Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa, an undocumented worker from Mexico, made a curious and undeniably bad decision. After working under an assumed name for six years, he decided to use his real name and exchanged one set of phony identification numbers for another.
The change made his employer suspicious and the authorities were called in. The old numbers were made up, but the new ones he bought happened to belong to real people. Federal prosecutors said that was enough to label Flores-Figueroa an identity thief.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday on prosecutors' aggressive use of a new law that was intended to strengthen efforts to combat identity theft. In at least hundreds of cases last year, workers accused of immigration violations found themselves facing the more serious identity theft charge as well, without any indication they knew their counterfeit Social Security and other identification numbers belonged to actual people and were not made up.
The government has used the charge, which carries a mandatory two-year minimum prison term, to persuade people to plead guilty to the lesser immigration charges and accept prompt deportation. Many of those undocumented workers had been arrested in immigration raids.
The case hinges on how the justices resolve this question: Does it matter whether someone using a phony ID knows that it belongs to someone else? (excerpt) read more at usatoday.com
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Supreme Court will hear illegal immigrant ID theft case
Many illegal immigrants steal social security numbers and use them as their own. They can not easily get a real social security number assigned to them. They must give something to their employer when they are hired. They may be using yours. Under a new law that was intended to strengthen efforts to combat identity theft, some prosecutors are taking these illegal immigrants to court on a charge that could bring two years in jail. Immigrants' rights groups have cried foul and took one of these cases to the Supreme court. They argue these criminals don't know they are using someone's social security number and have no intention of identity theft. If you are using someones social security number, you have already stolen their identification. That is the primary number used for credit, health insurance and taxes. Hopefully, the "Supremes" will rule on the side of protecting law abiding citizens this time.
I read my local newspaper article of February 22, 2009 on the case of Flores-Figueroa v. U.S., 08-108.
ReplyDeleteI am completely numbed to hear that more than 20 immigrants' rights groups are representing Mr. Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa. An illegal immigrant from Mexico who was charged with identity theft. Perhaps even more shocking is that the United States Supreme Court took up the certiorari.
You see Mr. Masterson I am a law abiding American Citizen.
I have been battling my local school district in San Diego California since the year 2000.
Since the year 2000 I contacted so many non-profit organizations for assistance and received no assistance. In fact I would not be surprised if the 20 listed organizations were the same one I contacted for assistance.
I filed a case in federal court in pro se in an IDEA case (Individual with Disabilities Ed. Act.) I was dismissed because I was not a licensed attorney to represent my child. I appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court and my case was used in the oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court Winkelman Certiorari. Well, the Supreme Court ruled in favor or the Winkelman’s. When my case came up for appeal over 16-months later (after the Winkelman’s ruling) in the 9th circuit court. It was papered with the other pro se cases in the “NINTH CIRCUIT PRO SE TASK FORCE.” The Ninth Circuit judges who papered my case were B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW.
Not only did I not have an opportunity for my case to be heard by a three-judge panel. My case was dismissed in an unpublished Memorandum with cases that were totally irrelevant to my appeal by Circuit Judges B. FLETCHER, THOMAS, and WARDLAW. To make matters worst the 9th Circuit panel disregarded the U.S. Supreme Court Winkelman’s decision in its entirety. I filed a Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court and on the day my case came up all of the cases on the docket were dismissed. Yes, the Supreme Court does not look over cases either [The U.S. Supreme Court receives over 7,500 requests for certiorari per year and only accepts less than 70 cases.]
The reason why I am writing this is that I honestly lost faith and respect for my own government.
I am ashamed to be an American.
The judges in the Ninth Circuit Court were the most liberal judges who have ruled in favor of illegal aliens consistently and have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court various times. All of the organizations that I went to for assistance turned me down. Yes I am sure the organizations that are helping illegal immigrant Mr. Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa were the same organizations that turned me down.
Now I know that these same organizations operated and run by public grants paid for by our tax dollars. So how do you think I feel knowing that illegal aliens who violate the law like Mr. Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa have access to UNITED STATES COURTS? While AMERICAN CITIZENS like myself are DENIED ACCESS to the courts or the right to have their appeal be heard by a three-judge panel?
Yes Justice in not blind and America has no respect or grant rights to its own citizens.
While illegal aliens have access to the courts Americans are routinely DENIED ACCESS TO THE COURTS.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-983.pdf
http://www.olrs.ohio.gov/asp/winkelmandecision.asp
I believe that what it all amounts to is DENIAL OF ACCESS TO THE COURTS FOR WOMEN in this country. Particularly in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, District Federal Courts and state courts. There are a lot of women who have been denied access to the courts in the United States particularly in California the most liberal state.
One would think that an organization would take up their cause. To protect the rights of women to bring their grievances in a proper forum but not so in the United States.
Since women do not have rights to the courts in the United States of America there must be an international organization that would be willing to take up the cause. Perhaps in Europe or in the Middle East, who would want to fight for American Women to protect their constitutional rights and have access to the U.S. Courts.
You may contact your local California newspaper to contact these invisible women because the newspapers all know about them. Have refused to write a newspaper article about the issue. But hey!!! Lets keep protecting and advocating for illegal aliens and turn our back on American Citizens.
Case in point today decision in the Ninth Circuit Appeals of Soto-Olarte v. Holder, No. 06-71822 a illegal alien immigration case. The Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of the illegal alien.
On the other hand the NINTH CIRCUIT COURT of APPEALS has completely denied access to pro se WOMEN to have access the courts in the UNITED STATES of AMERICA.
cases like:
Houston v. EUSD, in the USDC Southern district of California and 9th Cir.
Stewart v, PUSD, in the USDC Southern district of California and 9th Cir.
Peters v. Guajome Park Academy in the USDC Southern district of California and 9th Cir.
Russell vs. the Department of Education [Hawaii] 9th circuit court
Blanchard v. Morton School District, 9th circuit court
Shinoff v. Larkins USDC Southern district of California and CA state court