These are such a small fraction of the overall effort. Anti-deportation libs make them poster-child examples for their TDS tirades.
The people hiring the illegals hanging out at Home Depot ought to get arrested.
And legal residents who wait there for day labor jobs shouldn’t hang with the illegals. Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas. Or, at a minimum, have their proof of legal residency with them if they get caught up in a sweep.
The number of people detained certainly raises suspicions of the hiring practices of Hyundai and their contractor.
I used to work at a manufacturing plant for a major corporation whose name would be immediately recognizable. We also used contractors for labor. The contractor would supply labor for surges and long term. Those that were there long term we could then pick-n-choose whom to offer full-time company jobs. Basically the temp employees were in a probationary period so we could see how they worked out.
Given that, I 100% support inquires into the hiring practices of Hyundai and the contractor. But don’t be surprised. Hiring law and I-9 verification has many loopholes where if the employer can show compliance then their ass is covered. They are going to need someone on the inside.
If DOJ can get the evidence, prosecute to the maximum penalties of the law.
WW
Thats false
Private property.
If only the left still controlled the Supreme Court like they did for decades, they could make the detention of illegals de facto impossible because there is no way a warrant can be issued for someone who passed namelessly across our border when no one was around.
But they don’t.
Home Depot I can understand your point. Traffic stops, no.
At least in Texas.
You can’t get a drivers license without proof of citizenship. If you are stopped in traffic, that is automatically going to lead to a demand for a license. If you don’t have one, you will be detained and they are going to enquire as to why. It’s sort of a natural progression.
That’s what segregationists used to argue in the 1960s. Didn’t work. I still remember the signs “we retain the right to refuse service to anyone”. Didn’t work.
Public.
Besides, these take place in the parking lots.
I don’t see a difference between targeting the illegals who hang out in front Home Depot
and
targeting drug dealers in front of liquor stores, child predators in front of roller rinks etc..
(Well except that some people like one crime and don’t like the others.)
You’re arguing public accomodation laws for 4th Amendment violations?
Parking lots are private property.
Do you see any difference in public and private property?
In either case, you need probable cause of a crime to demand identification.
Seems like wearing a Chicago Bulls would suffice.
WW
hanging out at home depot looking for day work is probable cause.
Why is that?
Loitering.
Shopping parking lots are property of the shopping center owner.
I am not sure about that.
but I know that standing in a parking lot provides no protection for
drug dealers, child predators, job thieves, not any other class of criminal.
Tangent:
I also know that
“but but but he has been commiting the same crime ever day for ten years including yesterday . . . we should make that crime legal for him now”
is very poor logic
No it’s not.
It’s looking for work.
Ok but isn’t the store owner or their designated assistant supposed to be the ones who call the cops?
Work is counter revolutionary.
