Federal Court Denies American Civil Rights Protections Again

In a February 18, 2009, article in the Washington Times was a report on a recent case heard in U.S. District Court in Tucson with respect to 16 illegal immigrants who had trespassed on a rancher's property in their attempts to gain entry into the United States.

The rancher, Mr. Roger Barrett's, property has become a well known crossing point for the illegal immigrant population from Mexico, and is actually publicized on handout literature across the border for those seeking to immigrate to this country without going through the formal immigration process since few who enter this country unlawfully do so at the official ports of entry.

Apparently, Mr. Barrett caught these 16 illegal immigrants on his property while patrolling his land, which many Arizona rancher's have been reduced to doing since our federal government under the Bush Administration and now Obama Administration continues to promote open borders now even seven years after 9/11.

The border situation has been troublesome for many years for the border state residents who have and continue to be victimized by this negligence on the part of the federal government in "providing for the common defense," with more and more resident's lives and property victimized each and every year.

Now it is spreading to middle American towns and cities and has gained national attention. It would behoove any and all residents in those states to listen to the majority of border state resident's views on this subject, since they have seen how first hand this situation is not only a vital national security issue, but also quality of life issue for all Americans.

There are now upwards of four to five hour waits in hospitals in the border states now due to the provision now of federal health care benefits which have been extended for "emergency" treatments which cover anything from the flu to job related injuries at the general public's provision and expense.

The case was brought by a group of lawyers affiliated with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Foundation, who are federally funded with grant monies in order to support their organization's mission. However, these individuals were not Mexican AMERICANS, but Mexican illegals.

Due also to the lobbying efforts of the ACLU more than a decade ago, there is now a federal statute which provides that for civil rights violations in this country, the award of attorney's fees in such actions can be submitted to the federal government for the reimbursement of legal fees and costs in such matters.

Thus, the ACLU and other minority organizations have been running wild and actually creating cases in some instances now in order to benefit under that federal statute at the public's expense.

It is now even being interpreted to also cover the "civil rights" of non citizens such as in this particular case, contrary to the very wording and foundation of our Constitution which states: "We the people of the United States....FOR US AND OUR POSTERITY.....do hereby ordain this Constitution of the United States of America."

Interesting to note that although the defense attorney in this action weakly mentioned the lack of "standing" these 16 illegals actually had in our courts, it was not the thrust of his defense. A jury dismissed a number of charges against Mr. Barrett and his wife, but upheld the "civil rights" violations of the emotional distress which was inflicted upon them when Mr. Barrett held them until the Border Patrol agents could be summoned. One of the illegals was a known drug trafficker, and others had crossing unlawfully on numerous occasions.

Given the tenor of the border state residents in Arizona over this issue and their victimization, it is surprising that this was a jury trial, although appears the award was actually judicially determined. Personally due to the outcome, I would have liked to have seen the "voir dire" or the questions presented to potential jurors for their selection in this case, as it appears there was a political precedence the main aim here again.

The judge in this case awarded over $60,000 to these "victims," although the case apparently is to be appealed on the grounds of a neglected jury instruction. The defense attorney took great pains to extol the virtues of the judge in question, while it appears did not vigorously challenge the legal standing of these litgants on Constitutional grounds.

I wonder if that jury instruction just may have been in adequately informing the jurors of the "true law," of the land with respect to those issues, our Constitution, or even the fact that in this country as a government "of the people" the juries actually also have the power to overrule existing law or it's application in any matter placed before it.

So much for citizen's Bill of Rights protections, and property rights which are being assaulted on all fronts in this country at the present time in these type actions at both federal and state levels with also the Kelo decision several years ago, and even the removal of federal bankruptcy protections in such matters on any level with respect to home ownership and homestead protections.

Again, our politically now compromised court system has undermined everything our founders fought and died for in this sovereign nation they intended to create, welcoming immigration and extending to all that swear to it, and it alone, allegiance in the protections of those natural and inalienable rights they recognized. Not to those merely seeking to profit at the lawful citizenry's expenses, or use it merely as a place of commerce without forever severing their ties to foreign nations.

Another sad day for America and Americans, and "justice for all."

For any interesed, the article may be found at: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/18/rancher-cleared-in-rights-case/