Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim S who wrote (3657)	4/29/2000 9:48:00 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

As the INS can determine the location in which an alien without parole (Elian) resides in this country, the INS was within its rights to take him and transport him where it felt he belonged. No law has to be violated for the INS to "seize" an alien and transport him within the country. If they suspected that aliens were in an apartment house, a restaurant, or a factory and there might be trouble in removing them to another place, I am sure agents would go in armed. Whether or not they decided to arrest the landlord or employer in these circumstances, issue a summons, or just be satisfied with the action they took to remove the alien, may well be discretionary. You seem to be confusing the right of the INS to remove an alien from one locale to another and to do so carrying arms if they sense there could be trouble, with the issue of whether the Lazaro family was violating the law. The INS does not need to determine a violation of law by the persons accompanying the alien, to take action to remove the alien from that place and, again, to do so with arms and a show of force if they think this will deter resistance (that no one was injured speaks well of the operation). It's best not to confuse the question of whether or not Lazaro committed a crime/should have been arrested with the issue of INS authority to remove an alien from a private home with or without the homeowner's acquiescence. These are two distinct legal issues.