Still basking in the California Supreme Court’s recent decision to uphold AB 540 — a law allowing certain undocumented students to pay in-state tuition — young immigrants like UCSB student Neyra Pacheco are nevertheless waiting with bated breath to see if the House of Representatives will vote in favor of the DREAM Act this week.
If enacted, the DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act would allow illegal immigrants who entered the United States before they were 16 years old to earn an opportunity for citizenship if they graduate from high school, go to college or enroll in the military, and avoid getting into trouble.
“I’m thankful and excited not only for myself, but also for the many people who are affected,” said Pacheco in the wake of the unanimous AB 540 ruling handed down on November 15. “But we still have a lot of work to do,” she continued, explaining that the DREAM Act’s fate still hangs in the balance as Democratic lawmakers make a final push for passage before Congress becomes more conservatively minded in a few short weeks.
The challenge to AB 540 — the state’s nonresident tuition exemption approved in 2001 that allows public colleges to offer in-state tuition to students who have attended California high schools for at least three years — was filed by a group of out-of-state students and their families in 2005. They argued undocumented residents shouldn’t be able to qualify for the exemption when they, lawful citizens, were left paying full out-of-state prices.
The group also said AB 540 doesn’t align with federal law which states “an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible [for college benefits] on the basis of residence within a State.”
In his written ruling, however, Justice Ming W. Chin said AB 540 really doesn’t have anything to do with legal residency, concluding that those who are given exceptions may not all necessarily be California residents. In other words, Chin interpreted, a student who attended high school in California for three years but then moved to a different state would still qualify for in-state tuition. Similarly, a student who attended boarding school in California but lived permanently elsewhere would be eligible.
“If Congress had intended to prohibit states entirely from making unlawful aliens eligible for in-state tuition, it could easily have done so,” wrote Chin, considered one of the more conservative justices. “It could simply have provided, for example, that ‘an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible’ for a postsecondary education benefit. But it did not do so.”
“Every nonresident who meets [the law’s] requirements — whether a United States citizen, a lawful alien or an unlawful alien — is entitled to the nonresident tuition exemption,” he summed up. “It cannot be the case that states may never give a benefit to unlawful aliens without giving the same benefit to all American citizens.” At the moment, 10 other states in the country have laws similar to AB 540.
Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado — who coauthored AB 540 more than a decade ago — spoke to The Independent immediately following the ruling and said the decision validated his motivation for writing the law in the first place: Many undocumented students came to this country with their families when they were very young, he explained. Their illegal status is no fault of their own and they shouldn’t be priced out of a higher education because of it.
Maldonado said he’s spoken with many high schoolers over the years who graduated at the top of their classes but realized, when they started applying to colleges, that they’d be forced to pay more expensive out-of-state costs. (The difference between in-state and out-of-state tuition at a University of California school is around $23,000 per year.) This would oftentimes force them to give up on dreams of continuing on. “California taxpayers are invested in these children,” said Maldonado, “and these are the kids who are going to be holding top jobs in future. For us to spend then throw away 14 years’ worth of taxpayers’ money doesn’t make any sense,” he said.
UC President Mark Yudof echoed a similar sentiment in a prepared statement: “Through their hard work and perseverance, these students have earned the opportunity to attend UC. Their accomplishments should not be disregarded or their futures jeopardized.”
Neyra Pacheco is one such student, able to attend UCSB only because of her AB 540 qualifications. But the environmental studies and history of public policy double major said, even with the exemption, paying for a spot in the university is still a challenge. She started working as a junior in high school, and all the money she earned from then until graduation went toward her first year at college. During summers she’s held down as many as three jobs in order to keep paying her fees, and has been forced at times to take time off while she earns more tuition-bound cash. Plus, she noted, undocumented students still are not eligible for federal, state, or institutional financial aid, meaning they pay everything out of pocket.
Pacheco, born in Oaxaca, Mexico, came to the United States when she was six years old, she said. He mother died when she was two, and she lived with her grandmother while her father worked in the U.S.“Times were tough,” she said. She eventually joined her father, enrolling in kindergarten without knowing a word of English.
But she learned fast, she explained, eventually attending La Cumbre Junior High School and San Marcos High School here in Santa Barbara, excelling in her gifted and advanced-placement courses. Pacheco always knew she was an undocumented resident, she said, but the reality of that fact didn’t weigh on her mind until high school. It was then she began to worry about how she’d be able to eventually drive, vote, and attend college.
Now in her third year at UCSB, Pacheco is a member of a campus group called IDEAS (Improving Dreams Equality Access and Success) that advocates on behalf of immigrant students — many of whom, she said, live in a state of confusion and fear because of their status — connecting them with financial and academic resources. The 50-person organization also educates its peers of their rights and options, explained Pacheco. She estimates that there are currently around 250 undocumented students at UCSB. The number at SBCC is much larger, she predicts, with as many as 2,000 students enrolled right now.
According to admissions officers at UCSB and SBCC, there are 135 and 321 students, respectively, who qualified and are taking advantage of AB 540’s allowances. In the UC system overall, officials said, about 2,000 students paid in-state tuition as provided by the law for the 2008-09 school year. Nearly 80 percent of those students were U.S. citizens or legal residents. Documented students have reportedly accounted for more than two-thirds of those who qualify each year.
Not everyone, though, is happy about AB 540’s survival. Marilyn DeYoung, board chair for the Santa Barbara-based Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) said immediately following the ruling, “This was wrong on so many counts. We are optimistic that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn this, but we really must focus our anger at the California Legislature, which cannot balance a budget, but spends millions of dollars on subsidies to those whose very presence in this country is illegal.”
She claimed “tuition discounts” cost state taxpayers more than $200 million every year. “This is quite outrageous. Our infrastructure is crumbling in an overpopulated, financially strapped California, and the Legislature provides an additional $23,000 per year to each illegal, foreign student — a gift that is not available to U. S. citizens in other states,” she said.
While many expect the state court’s decision to be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, the DREAM Act vote’s outcome remains uncertain. But Pacheco and members of IDEAS are hopeful that the law will get pushed through and provide their path to citizenship. “It will benefit students who have been here most of their lives and want to be productive and live their dreams,” Pacheco said. “We want to be able to use our degrees.”



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace








Previous Month



Comments
It it isn't undocumented ...it's illegal alien...
I sure like to hear some illegal alien worked 3 summer jobs.
Because that means some citizen could not work those jobs.
She lives with 5 families in a house to save rent.. Anyone ask their neighbors think about the noise and parking problems.
We are in a recession and can't afford to pay for all the services required by ilegal aliens. The citizens voted for that but were shot down by a liberal judge. Without the 10,000 illegal aliens living in Santa Barbara, we would actually have affordable housing and summer jobs for students.
Santa Barbara is rapidly becoming a town of millionairs and their gardners. This is not the American dream...it is Mexico's.
tireater (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 4:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Utoh. All this nuanced legal mumbo jumbo is going to have all the tea bagger right wing or conservative's undies in a knotted twist. But will they will somehow find a way to turn it into a political issue against the Lt. Gobernador.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 6:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Illegal alien" sounds like an invasion from outer space, and it is offensive. And since when is a person "illegal"? Working people who come here from other countries, as has been our history, might not have their documents to work, hence the term "undocumented".
And why all the hooplala about foreigners "invading" the US if they happen to be from south of the border? We don't hear that many derogatory remarks about the Asians, nor the Europeans nor the Africans who come here without documents. Is it racism?
Nearly half of our population in California is people of color. Looks to me like we need to learn to get along and appreciated the diversity! No need to be threatened by it.
Dotio (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 6:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So Dotio, would you be in favor of mass illegal immigration if the majority of said immigrants were poor, uneducated white Scandanavians?
revisionist (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 7:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"But she learned fast, she explained, eventually attending La Cumbre Junior High School and San Marcos High School here in Santa Barbara, excelling in her GATE and AP courses"
It's also interesting that the two Latinas now on the school board supported the shutdown of GATE saying it discriminated against Latinos. The Dos Pueblos PTSA President says Latino students can't succeed since the schools teach "white culture".
But the above story indicates that motivated people of any ethnicity, including Latino can succeed in the GATE and AP programs. Stories like this show that our local "progressive" educators need to rethink their hostile attitudes toward merit, assimilation and academic rigor.
revisionist (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented immigrant...
Is the same thing as calling a drug dealer...
an unlicensed pharmacist...
My neighborhood is described as 100% latino on the census.
What part of 'not the American dream' don't you get ?
tireater (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
and California continues its departure from the rest of the country. Secession anyone?
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 4:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"...would you be in favor of mass illegal immigration if the majority of said immigrants were poor, uneducated white Scandanavians?"
Can someone PLEASE stop hiding the history books from revisionist? You do know there were historical periods of large scale immigration of poor Europeans into the United States, right?
Of course, Scandinavians aren't poor and uneducated because all Scandinavians have access to their particular country's publicly funded education system, which includes college and graduate school. Did I mention they have HEALTH CARE? Those Commies!
Additionally, someone please explain to JohnLocke that the DREAM Act is FEDERAL legislation. I guess he's too busy complaining about (insert random issue here) to read for comprehension.
One would think a college educated immigrant who is looking to make a positive impact in the country in which she grew up might actually be the kind of "illegal immigrant" to whom we want to grant citizenship. But that goes against the "them there Mexicans is takin' our jobs" narrative that the right likes to spin when they're busy not taking responsibility for the economic hellstorm they've unleashed upon our country.
Plus, OAXACA don't sound like no Spanish name. OMG! That sounds like the Mexican Al-Qaeda! FEAR FEAR FEAR FEAR....
EatTheRich (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 5:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Of course, Scandinavians aren't poor and uneducated because all Scandinavians have access to their particular country's publicly funded education system, which includes college and graduate school. Did I mention they have HEALTH CARE?" -EatTheRich-
Perhaps Mexico should follow Scandinavia's example. If they did, maybe there would be no need for it's people to mass migrate/escape from their clearly failed system.
By the way, I know the "Commies" comment was tongue-in-cheek but there is a big difference between the Marxist oppression of the Soviet-bloc and the freedoms of Scandinavia. As far as I know, there are no gulags in Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Finland or Denmark.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 7:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
billclausen, perhaps Mexico and other Latin American countries would be able to be more economically stable and whatnot and be able to provide for their citizen the resources and opportunities they need if the United States didnt screw them over with legislation such as NAFTA. Of course, the vast majority of them presidents don't see how such legislation can be detrimental to their own countries.
Anyway, immigration isnt just about push factor but there is also a pull factor. The United States benefits from the cheap and unregulated labor undocumented people provide. Do a little research on what is happening to farms and dairy plants throughout the United States.
We always use the argument that these people come and take the jobs of citizens and whatnot, would all of you pick or work in a farm harvesting veggies and fruits in the blazing heat? clean my toilent? cook my food. You see, the jobs these people take are jobs that require labor. I would dare say most of you look for jobs where you can sell whatever skill that is you are great at. Immigrants coming from asian countries legaly provide other time or labor and skill. They all add to the economic system in their own way.
Im not sure if you are all aware of this one instance when farm owners and activist invited citizens to apply and work in the farms. Perhaps only a few showed up, where were you?
As per undocumented students, perhaps they might compete for jobs since theyre more skilled and prepared, but isnt that the whole principle of our precious capitalist society? to compete so that we can have the best of the best holding the jobs that make the country run smoothly?
The problem with the immigration debate is the fact that it is focused on people's emotions, which is hard to separate when many of us are struggling to stay atop... and i mean everyone, but to base an argument that will dictate law and policy on mere emotions seems like a great fallacy to me. Politicians and others create these sentiments and divide us, the 99% of people who are not ultra rich, so that they can continue to not take responsibility, fix the problems the country faces, or simply keep us in the dark about what theyre really doing... which often times is insuring the wealthy stay wealthy and the rest of us stay where we are.. Instead they create this hateful and negative atmosphere where everyone is against everyone forgetting about our good old values of respect, understanding, and cooperation... because at the end of the day arent we all citizens of the world and it so happens that some are stuck in unfortunate situations and are forced to move about. Boundaries, countries, definitions are man made.. and just like that they can change any moment.
dasvenusimpelz (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 8:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
cont...
But anyway, truth of the matter is that immigration, "legal or illegal," is a worldwide phenomenon that is extremely intricate and cannot be solved through hate and arguments based on mere fear or ignorance. We pride ourselves in being an advanced and logical nation, perhaps we should demonstrate to the rest of the world how humans should be treated and taken care of. regardless.
Criminals, felons, rapist, drug dealers, people who commit fraud.. of course they exist... across the palette of colors, nationalities, religions, legal status, sex, gender, etc. Stop associating these terms with certain groups and perhaps focus on how to not perpetuate stereotypes and patterns of how and what information is available to us. Don't let your fear, emotions, and ignorance get the best of you and simply be open to listen to what all sides have to say.
dasvenusimpelz (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 8:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
dasvenusimpelz - well said.
All of these emotions are being stirrred up so that people are distracted from the real issues. The Tea Party, which was supposed to be a grass roots organization, was actually well funded by the Koch brothers and Dick Armey. Their Tea Party followers, who said "keep your hands off my Social Security and Medicare" probably need their eyes opened to the fact that the people who are funding them are the very people who want to take those programs away, and that the people they are opposing are actually the ones who not only created those programs but want to continue them.
The US is going to spiral downwards because emotional issues promoted by the RW noise machine are drowning out the facts.
tabatha (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 9:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This is actually a good investment. We are getting bright, hard-working, and future tax-paying people to stay and invest in our country. Isn't this what the U.S. is; a place where people come to prosper and create. I would have a problem if general amnesty was given and we got millions of general laborers, of which we have plenty, instead of the most ambitious and creative of the bunch. The U.S. needs more professionals.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 29, 2010 at 9:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To address the issue of N.A.F.T.A.: I suspected this trade issue was no good when it was a done deal by Clinton and all the living ex-presidents at the time it was lorded over on us. That having been said, Mexico has had major problems for a long, long, time and while N.A.F.T.A. has made things worse, to blame it on N.A.F.T.A. alone, is not addressing the whole issue.
"The US is going to spiral downwards because emotional issues promoted by the RW noise machine are drowning out the facts."
You have 50% of the issue covered, but the Left Wingers have just as much baseless rhetoric as well. As long as people have the simplistic approach that defeating the left wingers...or the right wingers will solve our problems, then the worst of both sides shall prevail.
90%+ of the American public still buy into whoever the Republicrats nominate in their duopoly farce, and as long as that continues, there is no hope for positive change.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 3:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
@Tabatha: Dick Armey and the corporatist backers of the Tea Party are as much for open borders as anyone. Armey is one of the strongest supporters of amnesty and unlimited immigration around.
@Everyone: The DREAM act is not a narrow amnesty for bright college graduates. Some Senate versions would grant amnesty to anyone up to age 35 who claimed to have arrived in the US before age 16. Only one year of post high-school education is required in the loosest versions of the bill to get a green card.
So a 34 year old illegal alien gang member could get his GED, sign up for a year of Chicano Studies at City College, and get a green card. Also note that any application, however fraudulent made under the DREAM act would immediately stop any deporation proceedings and make the alien non-deportable until his/her status was resolved. The burden of proof would be on DHS, and not the applicant to prove they were eligible.
Up to 1/6 of illegal aliens would be immediately amnestied under the DREAM act, but once the amnestied individual reaches 21, they can sponsor their relatives for green cards. The total number amnestied under DREAM could be 1/3 to 1/2 of illegal aliens.
revisionist (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 7:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As a graduate of UCSB and descendent of granparents who worked their butts off to come to this country legally, I'm outraged by this nonsense. Rather than deport criminal scum, we're rewarding them?
winddancer1562 (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 8 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So now they can enroll in all sorts of worthless ethnic social science majors where leftist professors pontificate about the evils of America. Wow. An illegal alien, on tax-payer subsidized "in state tuition", majoring in something like Chicano Studies and learning about how whitey stole Aztlan (with a minor in gender studies emphasizing the history of under-represented transgendered little-people).
Scooter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
""Illegal alien" ... it is offensive."
...no, it is accurate. What is offensive is the ridiculous agenda to somehow change reality by changing the descriptive term used. Look, ILLEGAL = NOT LEGAL. Even my 5yr old knows that if you break the law, there are consequences... yet there is this absurd movement to not only ignore that fact where illegal aliens are concerned but to actually reward that status as well - even giving them special perks that actual legal citizens are not allowed.
cartoonz (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
THANK YOU! Now I have the ULTIMATE plan to get into grad school! Here's what I'll do:
1) Renounce my American citizenship.
2) Get deported back to my birth country of Cuba.
3) Make it back to the US illegally, more than likely on an innertube.
4) Apply for grad school.
Thank you all for the DREAM Act, a new chapter in my life has been opened(For the low, low price of free, well, for me anyways. After all, who cares about those Gringo taxpayers?)! :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How about if it was only offered to students with majors in science or medicine?
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 1:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I like it, good idea AZ2. Much better. Or perhaps those wishing to go into the teaching profession. No soft majors. Not politically-correct though, so no way it would be drawn up like that. Probably "offensive" to folks like Dotio.
Scooter (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
We are looking at a shortage of medical professionals, maybe by putting them at the top of the list and on a "fast-track" towards citizenship compared to putting people with "soft majors" on a probationary stay until it is for sure that they are going to graduate and have a job waiting. There are ways this can be done and it can benefit the country, we shouldn't be xenophobic. No matter what, anything that has to get the stamp of approval from politicians is bound to have flaws, intentional or not.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 5:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Deficits at the University of California are caused by Chancellors not politicians and undocumented illegals. UC Berkeley’s budget gap has grown to $150 million, & Chancellor Birgeneau is spending money that isn't there on $3,000,000 consultants. (A world-class East Coast University is doing the same as UC Berkeley without consultants: $0 cost). His reasons range from the need for impartiality to requiring the consultants "thinking".
Does this mean that the Faculty & management of UC Berkeley – flagship campus of the greatest public system of higher education in the world - lack the thinking, integrity, impartiality, innovation to identify savings? Have they been fudging their research for years?
The consultants will, by the way, get their recommendations from faculty & staff interviews; yet $150 million of inefficiencies could be found internally if the Chancellor & Provost Breslauer did the WORK of their $500,000 jobs (This simple point is lost on Breslauer, Birgeneau).
The victims of this folly are Faculty, Students & taxpayers.
There is only one conclusion as to why inefficiencies are not volunteered by faculty & staff: Chancellor Birgeneau & Provost Breslauer have lost the credibility & trust of Cal Faculty & Staff. Even if the faculty agrees the consultants' recommendations - disagreeing might put their jobs in jeopardy - the underlying problem of lost credibility & trust remains.
Contact your representatives in Sacramento: tell them of the hefty self-serving $’s being spent by Birgeneau & Breslauer.
Make a difference…speak your opinion 925 942 6082, 916 651 4007. Let there be light!
Moravecglobal (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 5:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What's the bigger "immigrant" problem? people moving here? or jobs moving away?
iriesouljah (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now that is a good question.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 30, 2010 at 7:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd much rather have a country full of people like Neyra Pacheco than the racist scum who oppose her.
truth_machine (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 12:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Even my 5yr old knows that if you break the law, there are consequences..."
It takes someone with more sense than a 5 year old -- which is all the sense you seem to have -- to realize that Neyra Pacheco didn't break any laws when she was *brought* here at 6 years old.
truth_machine (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 12:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What nation, what people has so little faith in itself that it sees its only hope in mass emigration. And this nation is not embarassed to beg another nation for education while condemning the educators as privileged racists.
revisionist (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 6:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
People like Truth Machine (a misnomer if ever there was one) love to throw around the "you are a hater, you are a racist" rubbish. It's the end all to any argument for them. Don't like illegal immigration? Well then, you are a racist. Want a gang injunction locally? Well then you must hate Latinos. The fact is that if we didn't have MASSIVE UNCHECKED ILLEGAL immigration from our southern border we could have a substantive discussion about letting in many more immigrants from around the globe - brown, yellow, white, whatever. Immigrants from Africa, Asia, eastern Europe, wherever. Those are the folks currently WAITING IN LINE, filling out papework, paying fees, obeying the laws of the nation. Many on the left who profess to being so color-blind, don't give a damn about all of those folks. For political purposes, they prefer the status quo and their own little set of rules (or lack thereof) for immigrants from Mexico and Central America ONLY. Unfortunately that doesn't work and is overwhelming the system (schools, courts, prisons, job market, you name it.) Let's focus on those who are doing things the right way, instead of always whining about the rough deal illegals are getting.
Scooter (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Revisionist's 6:28 a.m. 12/1 post hits the nail on the head. I would add only that there is no question that one who is brought to this country as a kid should not be punished for something they didn't do. (Just as people who are not responsible for the sins of past racism shouldn't be made to feel guilty either.
The core problem is--as revisionist points out--a country that has no faith in itself and uses another as a refugee camp while refusing to take responsibility for its own policies which drives people away from it. Some people have raised the N.A.F.T.A. issue as being part of the "push" factor, and from the evidence I've seen, I would agree with them, but the problems in Mexico have been going on long before N.A.F.T.A.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The same problems have existed in Mexico since the Aztecs. While they have had some great people in their history, this is something that has to be changed by the majority of the people not just a handful.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
December 1, 2010 at 9:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Cheap illegal labor is a bad drug and US companies need to kick the habit ASAP. It lowers the bar for everyone in society except the C-Suite execs at the companies employing the massive amounts of cheap illegal labor and possibly the shareholders. If there wasn't a constant supply of cheap illegal labor to do these less desirable manual labor jobs, companies would be forced to be inventive and come up with machines to do the work. Someone needs to manufacture the machine, someone needs to maintain the machine-those could be new American jobs that pay well. And when the machine breaks down it doesn't roll itself down to the local "free" medical clinic...it is not a drain on the societal safety net like cheap illegal labor is.
Mexico needs to fix itself and it cannot do that if all the industrious hard workers leave the country to come get exploited here. They need a home-grown revolution.
sbmomandpop (anonymous profile)
December 2, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mexico is ripe for a revolution, only problem is that it will be whoever is the strongest and cutthroat who survives. The revolution has to be among the people nationwide and there has to be fairness.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
December 3, 2010 at 11:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I forwarded this article to ICE and the Border Patrol. I hope they deport these people.
InTheKnow (anonymous profile)
December 4, 2010 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ha,ha ITK, they don't care, if they did there wouldn't be a need for laws like SB1070.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
December 4, 2010 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Scooter, denying your bigotry doesn't make it any less apparent.
truth_machine (anonymous profile)
December 16, 2010 at 3:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)