Uncaptured Criminals a “disfavored minority”

Readability

Uncaptured Criminals a "disfavored minority"

Lib­eral Ore­gon over­whelm­ingly voted to deny dri­vers licenses to ille­gal immi­grants and our lib­eral friends are not tak­ing this lying down:

A group of Mex­i­can immi­grants is suing to reverse a deci­sion by Ore­gon vot­ers on a 2014 bal­lot mea­sure that pre­vents undoc­u­mented immi­grants from get­ting Ore­gon dri­ver cards.

The real com­edy here is the basis for this law­suit (empha­sis mine)

In a law­suit filed Wednes­day in U.S. Dis­trict Court in Eugene, the plain­tiffs said the out­come of Mea­sure 88 is uncon­sti­tu­tional because it “arbi­trar­ily” denies dri­ving priv­i­leges “to Plain­tiffs and oth­ers based on their mem­ber­ship in a dis­fa­vored minor­ity group.”

A “dis­fa­vored minor­ity group” That’s an inter­est­ing turn of phrase. The ques­tion is they don’t spec­ify what dis­fa­vored minor­ity group they claim to be a part of.

Is it Mex­i­cans? Well accord­ing to the story the plain­tiffs are mex­i­cans but the denial of dri­vers licences are not based on coun­try of origin.

Per­haps they are talk­ing about race, being mex­i­cans one might assume the plain­tiffs are latino, but the denial of dri­vers licences are not based on race.

Per­haps the some of the plain­tiffs might be dis­abled, although there is noth­ing in the arti­cle that sug­gests it, but the denial of dri­vers licences are not based on disability.

Maybe the plain­tiffs are LGBT, although there is noth­ing in the arti­cle that sug­gest it, but the denial of dri­vers licences are not based on sex­ual preferences.

It could be some of the plain­tiffs are Mus­lim or Athe­ist or part of some odd reli­gious cult, but the denial of dri­vers licences are not based on religion.

There is in fact only one thing that the dri­vers licences are being denied on…having vio­lated fed­eral law, for being criminals.

Well they cer­tainly have a point that crim­i­nals are dis­fa­vored, depend­ing on their crime we exe­cute them, or lock them up for peri­ods of time, or make them pay heavy fines, or make them report reg­u­larly to author­i­ties, restrict their free­dom, restrict the jobs they may hold, deny them vot­ing priv­i­leges and on occa­sion deny them dri­ving priv­i­leges deport them, and that’s just the state.

It’s also true that crim­i­nals are a minor­ity. The vast major­ity of the pop­u­la­tion is not vio­lat­ing fed­eral law or state law. Despite their promi­nence in the news peo­ple who vio­late the law from mur­ders, to thieves to swindlers, to rapists, to dirty cops and pols etc etc etc are not a major­ity of the population.

But even among this group they are a dis­tinct minor­ity, they are a group of peo­ple vio­lat­ing fed­eral law and are not being arrested or pun­ished for it.

So to sum up: A group of peo­ple are claim­ing uncon­sti­tu­tional fed­eral dis­crim­i­na­tion on the basis of being a group of crim­i­nals who are vio­lat­ing fed­eral law with­out being pun­ished for it.

In a nor­mal age such a suit would be laughed away, in a nor­mal age the peo­ple bring­ing the suit would be arrested and deported.

But because it is con­sid­ered a polit­i­cal advan­tage by some to take this seri­ously this suit will pro­ceed and may even suc­ceed, yet another reminder of the insan­ity of our cur­rent era.

Clos­ing thought: I think that if this suit man­ages to suc­ceed the prece­dent will not be lost on other crim­i­nals who may use it for other purposes.

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $5200

Given that fact I would I ask you to please con­sider hit­ting DaTipJar.




[olimome­ter id=14]

That gets all the bills paid. Con­sider Sub­scrib­ing 100 Sub­scribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Sub­scrip­tion level



Addi­tion­ally our sub­scribers get our pod­cast emailed directly to them before it show up any­where else.

I know you can get the MSM for noth­ing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.

Liberal Oregon overwhelmingly voted to deny drivers licenses to illegal immigrants and our liberal friends are not taking this lying down:

A group of Mexican immigrants is suing to reverse a decision by Oregon voters on a 2014 ballot measure that prevents undocumented immigrants from getting Oregon driver cards.

The real comedy here is the basis for this lawsuit (emphasis mine)

In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Eugene, the plaintiffs said the outcome of Measure 88 is unconstitutional because it “arbitrarily” denies driving privileges “to Plaintiffs and others based on their membership in a disfavored minority group.”

A “disfavored minority group” That’s an interesting turn of phrase. The question is they don’t specify what disfavored minority group they claim to be a part of.

Is it Mexicans? Well according to the story the plaintiffs are mexicans but the denial of drivers licences are not based on country of origin.

Perhaps they are talking about race, being mexicans one might assume the plaintiffs are latino, but the denial of drivers licences are not based on race.

Perhaps the some of the plaintiffs might be disabled, although there is nothing in the article that suggests it, but the denial of drivers licences are not based on disability.

Maybe the plaintiffs are LGBT, although there is nothing in the article that suggest it, but the denial of drivers licences are not based on sexual preferences.

It could be some of the plaintiffs are Muslim or Atheist or part of some odd religious cult, but the denial of drivers licences are not based on religion.

There is in fact only one thing that the drivers licences are being denied on…having violated federal law, for being criminals.

Well they certainly have a point that criminals are disfavored, depending on their crime we execute them, or lock them up for periods of time, or make them pay heavy fines, or make them report regularly to authorities, restrict their freedom, restrict the jobs they may hold, deny them voting privileges and on occasion deny them driving privileges deport them, and that’s just the state.

It’s also true that criminals are a minority. The vast majority of the population is not violating federal law or state law. Despite their prominence in the news people who violate the law from murders, to thieves to swindlers, to rapists, to dirty cops and pols etc etc etc are not a majority of the population.

But even among this group they are a distinct minority, they are a group of people violating federal law and are not being arrested or punished for it.

So to sum up: A group of people are claiming unconstitutional federal discrimination on the basis of being a group of criminals who are violating federal law without being punished for it.

In a normal age such a suit would be laughed away, in a normal age the people bringing the suit would be arrested and deported.

But because it is considered a political advantage by some to take this seriously this suit will proceed and may even succeed, yet another reminder of the insanity of our current era.

Closing thought: I think that if this suit manages to succeed the precedent will not be lost on other criminals who may use it for other purposes.

****************************************************************************

The only pay I get for this work comes from you. My goal for 2015 is $22,000 and to date we’re only at $5200

Given that fact I would I ask you to please consider hitting DaTipJar.




Olimometer 2.52

That gets all the bills paid. Consider Subscribing 100 Subscribers at $20 a month will get the job done and then some.


Choose a Subscription level



Additionally our subscribers get our podcast emailed directly to them before it show up anywhere else.

I know you can get the MSM for nothing, but that’s pretty much what most of them are worth.