Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Immigration: Mexico threatens law suits
Posted by: mcq on Wednesday, May 17, 2006

If Mexico were bent on driving the rest of US public opinion against illegal immigrants coming over the southern border, I can't imagine a better way than with a spate of law suits (a true way to be a "neighbor and friend"):
Mexico said Tuesday that it would file lawsuits in U.S. courts if National Guard troops on the border become directly involved in detaining migrants.
Of course the claim is that National Guard troops will only be involved in support of any effort on the border. And, of course, it is perfectly legal to use National Guard troops for such a role. So why the possibility of suits?
Mexican border officials also said they worried that sending troops to heavily trafficked regions would push illegal migrants into more perilous areas of the U.S.-Mexican border to avoid detection.
Obviously the crossing patterns will change as more personnel (be they NG or Border Patrol agents) are plugged into the more popular (and easy) crossing points. Illegal immigrants will seek less patrolled areas in which to cross.

The plan calls for the Guard to provide intelligence and support (thereby releasing more BP agents for duty on the border) for a year until 6,000 more BP agents are trained for border patrol assignment. I've outlined my problems with the National Guard plan here. But suffice it to say, filing lawsuits against an overwhelmingly popular reaction to the flood of illegal immigrants seems to me to be self-defeating — at least in the realm of US public opinon.
"If there is a real wave of rights abuses, if we see the National Guard starting to directly participate in detaining people ... we would immediately start filing lawsuits through our consulates," Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez told a Mexico City radio station. He did not offer further details.
Notice the implicit assumption found in Derbez's statement:"If there is a real wave of rights abuses ...". What, troops equal "rights abuses"? How else do you interpret any other way. And then this:
Mexican officials worry the crackdown will lead to more deaths. Since Washington toughened security in Texas and California in 1994, migrants have flooded Arizona's hard-to-patrol desert and deaths have spiked. Migrant groups estimate 500 people died trying to cross the border in 2005. The Border Patrol reported 473 deaths in the fiscal year ending Sept. 30.

In Ciudad Juarez, Julieta Nunez Gonzalez, local representative of the Mexican government's National Immigration Institute, said Tuesday she will ask the government to send its migrant protection force, known as Grupo Beta, to more remote sections of the border.
That's a legitimate worry for Mexicans, i.e. increased deaths. However, is "Grupo Beta's" deployment one which will help keep illegals from trying to cross in more remote areas? Well, read how this description of the group is phrased:

Grupo Beta, the Mexican police unit that began operations in Tijuana in 1990 to protect northbound migrants from criminals, has developed a reputation for honesty and efficiency. Grupo Beta is an agency of the immigration service, which is part of the Interior Ministry.
"Hi, we're from the government and we're here to help (you cross illegally, but safely)."

Nice little euphemism for illegal immigrants, eh? "Northbound migrants"? (But then consider the way AP writes the story — the lawsuits are threatened if the NG becomes directly involved in apprehending "migrants".) And notice that Grupo Beta's job is to ease entry through protection of illegals, er, "northbound migrants" from "criminals", and not prevent or discourage illegal entry.

Nunez also made a statement which I'd consider a good possibility since the present plan, in reality, is wholly inadequate for real border security:
Sending the National Guard "will not stop the flow of migrants, to the contrary, it will probably go up," as people try to get into the U.S. in the hope that they could benefit from a possible amnesty program, Nunez said.
There is the "A" word again, and what she says is absolutely correct as long as it is left out there as a possibility. Regardless of what the White House claims, a "temporary worker program" with a "path to citizenship" equals amnesty to most of those here illegally. And that means others will try to get here as well so they can be included in the eventual deal. This is one of the reasons so many people are calling for the umbrella immigration issue to be broken out into border security first (as a separate bill) and once the borders are secure to our satisfaction (IOW, we see real not vapor progress in securing them) then take up immigration and the status of illegals.

However, back to the point of the post, I can't imagine a worse PR disaster for Mexico than for it to try tying up the ability of the US to secure its borders within our own court system. Americans are a sympathetic lot and have a great deal of empathy toward people trying to better their lives. That's why this is such a divisive issue within the populace. But as a British newspaper found out when it tried to influence the vote in an Ohio county, Americans do not take well to foreign entites trying to intrude on what we feel is our domestic business.

Fair warning to Mexico.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

There is a significant element within the Chicano elite that sees the American Southwest as stolen from their people.

Their goal is not assimilation but reconquista.

Here is an article by Michelle Malken which addresses this:
Written By: Jill Henry
Mexico, like Venezuela, and the West Bank are democracies. Politicians in democracies say and do things for domestic consumption. Its safe to say that they care as much about how things they do play out in the American media as we care how what we do plays out in the Mexican media.

BTW the legacy of Abu Ghraib and our refusal to disavow torture as a policy has left us in a world where even allies, like Mexico, think that the use of US troops means lack of due process, right’s abuses, and perhaps even torture.

Its not like anybody trusts to do the right thing us anymore.
Written By: cindy bravo
URL: http://
resoprosity. I wonder if the Mexicans have ever heard of it.

Violating sovereignty by messing in the internal affairs of another country has pushback.

First we have Mexican officials come to the May 1st rallies, now we get threatened lawsuits.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Ah I was wondering when that now classic touchstone "Abu Ghraib" would come into the conversation. For the left, that phrase is used when they want to invoke shame and shut down the conversation (like speaking to a german about WW2). It, off course, doesn’t mean has anything to do with Mexico’s decision process, and when has that stopped cindyb from the taking a cheap shop and applying a well worn non sequitor.
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
"Violating sovereignty by messing in the internal affairs of another country has pushback."

What, like the US "influencing" Mexico’s drug laws?
Written By: Tito
URL: http://

How can a foreign country file a lawsuit in a US Court? That doesn’t make sense to me - they don’t have any legal standing, do they?
Written By: Unknown
URL: http://
My question is, what could possibly be the basis of the suit?
Written By: Radical Centrist
URL: http://
Neo - it is "reciprocity"

cindy bravo - Venezuela is poster child for democracy. Perhaps we should emulate some of Chavez’ actions in the US? Or maybe not. Then you go throwing out the Abu Graig and torture references. Wow - I hope you warmed up before you stretched that much.

If Mexico truly is a friend, they will work with us to stop the flow of ILLEGAL border crossers.
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
I only pointed out Abu Graig so that some of the wingnuts here would realize there are consequences of our actions that go far beyond the war on terror. It makes it hard for us to the the Mexicans that the National Guard are really the good guys. We will all be big losers if we turn this into a shooting war.

I have no opinion about Chavez other than to note that he was elected and to point out that there is a differnce between democracy and pro-american that we need to keep in mind while we are trupeting our sucesesses in building an Iraqi democracy.

Written By: cindyb
URL: http://
Funny, I don’t see any mexican politicians mentioning Abu Ghraib (just the moonbats). In fact the leftist candidate for the presidency calls the fleeing of people to the US a national disgrace.

I quote:
"They are the ones mostly responsible for what is going on because there is no employment, there are no jobs in Mexico so people need to emigrate," Lopez Obrador said on his morning television show."

He said Bush’s plan, announced on Monday night, to deploy up to 6,000 National Guard troops to help secure the Mexican border would not end the flow of illegal aliens.

"It is not the solution. It is not an alternative but it is a disgrace for us Mexicans because of the irresponsible rulers of this country," the leftist said.
C’mon, cindy, that was hyperbolic and a cheap shot (rather typical of the type of debate that you do here). So the entire US military is torturing everyone in their custody?? Everyone? Time to get that that tinfoil hat re-lined.

Think to re-eval your anti americanism. Isn’t it.
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Its safe to say that they care as much about how things they do play out in the American media as we care how what we do plays out in the Mexican media.
What effect they have on their own population isn’t the point. The point is the effect it has on ours when we get irked at them messing with our internal politics, even if what they are mumbling is only intended for their local consumption.

Meanwhile, Abu-Ghraib to you too. I see you’re headed down the left path where you’re theorizing this is going to turn into war (a real shooting war too!!!!!, kids stand back now, someone might get hurt!!!!).
Just how far are you going to stretch? Aren’t you afraid you’ll hurt something?

Chavez, Castro, Iran, democracy, hooooo-raaaaaaaaa. I bet you’d have an opinion if it was the US playing best buddies with Cuba & Iran though.
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Mexican border officials also said they worried that sending troops to heavily trafficked regions would push illegal migrants into more perilous areas of the U.S.-Mexican border to avoid detection.

Translation: "Waaaaah! You’re making it harder for us to break your laws. Waaaaah!"
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
There is a significant element within the Chicano elite that sees the American Southwest as stolen from their people

Given that they stole it from a couple dozen indian tribes, Chicano must mean ’hypocrite’ in Spanish.
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
It makes it hard for us to the[sic] the Mexicans that the National Guard are really the good guys.

Cindy, you seem to be laboring under a serious misapprehension as to the fundamental purpose of the National Guard. I’ll give you a hint — it’s not to be ’good guys’ in the eyes of foreign invaders.
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
Come on guys, cindyb might be on to something here. We line the border the symbol of Abu Ghraib, scarecrow style. That’ll keep them out. Obviously, all those millions that are illegally crossing the border hadn’t got the message that we torture people. You don’t go looking for a better life in a place that tortures, do you cindy?
Written By: Wilky
URL: http://
"I have no opinion about Chavez other than to note that he was elected and to point out that there is a differnce between democracy and pro-american..."

No opinion? I would like to point out that there is also a difference between democracy and anti-americanism. The vast majority of people on this site do know the difference between a political system and foreign policy.
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Yes, scarecrows of men with panties on their head. We will attract every male fratenity member in Mexico and South America.
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Would these lawsuits be jury trials? They might be fun to watch, especially jury selection.
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

One thing I really can’t believe is this Mexican Tourism ad from Jones American Comedy Network. "Experience Mexico the way they experience the USA". They have it in their podcast too.
Written By: Steve Waikley
Most definetly the US knows nothing about stealing land from indian tribes, and ignores the meaning of hypocricy. Chicano doesnt mean hypocrite in spanish, but let me tell what it means in english: a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
To set an example we could mention the Structural Adjustment Packages "imposed by the IMF" the US so emphatically promotes in developing countries, but that they dont personally apply in domestic policies.
Neo was speaking that violating a countrys sovereignty has pushback, in the US that puchback translates into over 2000 american soldiers dead in Irak. How much pushback are we willing to stand. And please lets not kid ourselfs about the danger Hussein posed to the US and its citizens. Its time for the US to rethink its foreign policy in all respects, or be willing to in 50 years from now stand alone with few if any allies. Who will be correct 50 years from now.
Written By: Armando
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks