Hello Tom, I have first hand knowledge of your problem. My
granddaughter has married an illegal Mexican immigrant. I am not in
favour of granting driver's licenses to illegals, but I know that it
happens often. My granddaughter's spouse has a valid Oregon driver's
license and resides in Idaho. I recently complained to the Idaho DOT
because he lives in Idaho and has been ticketed several times for
speeding in Idaho and continues to use the Oregon license. Their
response was to contact my representative and complain. I would say
from this response that Oregon and Idaho would be good choices for
obtaining a driver's license. I also found a very interesting article
while searching:
http://www.tennessean.com/government/archives/04/07/54321069.shtml
Driver's license law discriminatory, federal lawsuit says
State's immigrants, Hispanic residents claim new policies unconstitutional
Tennessee's new driver's license law discriminates against both
immigrants and Hispanic residents, and it clearly violates the U.S.
Constitution, according to a federal lawsuit filed yesterday.
Last week, Geraldine Gurdian's Nicaraguan passport, Florida driver's
license and permanent residency card were confiscated by a clerk who
said ''you don't even know English'' when she tried to get a driver's
license at the Hart Lane station in Nashville, according to the
complaint.
She was among plaintiffs in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court
that claims the state's unique new law ''exhibit(s) a deliberate
indifference'' to the constitutional rights of immigrants and
Hispanics and a ''pervasive pattern'' of discriminatory actions in
day-to-day operations at driver's license offices.
Under the 6-week-old law, driving certificates will be issued in place
of driver's licenses to temporary and illegal immigrants. Good only
for driving, they'll say ''not valid for identification.''
Neither Department of Safety Commissioner Fred Phillips nor his
spokeswoman would comment on the lawsuit and refused to answer even
general questions about routine departmental policies.
''To the policy itself, what this governor is trying to achieve is a
common-sense approach to balancing the needs of public safety and
homeland security,'' said Lydia Lenker, spokeswoman for Gov. Phil
Bredesen. Lenker said she couldn't comment on the suit.
The driver's license law has been the subject of national attention
since the governor signed it into law in May.
The policy creates two types of driving documents: driver's licenses
for those who can prove they're either citizens or legal permanent
residents, and driving certificates for those who can't. Stamped ''not
valid for identification,'' certificates are intended to be used only
for driving and not to board a plane, buy a gun or rent a car,
according to policy-makers.
Bredesen has called it the ''strictest driver's license law in the
country.'' He also has said it addresses national security concerns by
barring all but citizens and legal, permanent residents from getting a
valid state license, and it ensures that everyone on Tennessee roads ?
including illegal immigrants ? is qualified to drive.
The attorney filing the suit, Jose Gonzalez, disputes that.
''Despite their assertion that homeland security is a compelling
interest, I think their real reason for this law is that they don't
like illegal aliens getting driver's licenses,'' said Gonzalez.
Gonzalez cited another plaintiff who sought a state ID for her
8-year-old Mexican-born son as an example. Minors are eligible for
state IDs, Gonzalez said. When Yolanda Lewis' son was turned down, she
was told he would only be eligible for a driving certificate and then
? when she pointed out his age ? was refused any document at all.
''On what basis do they deny an 8-year-old child an ID? On what basis
do they show that this child is a national security risk?''
''They have the burden of showing that this really addresses homeland
security. And they haven't.''
Gonzalez will be seeking a preliminary injunction later this week to
stop the state immediately from issuing any more driving certificates
until a judge rules on the lawsuit. He also will ask that the suit be
considered a class-action suit applying to all immigrants and Hispanic
residents who might be affected by the law.
The suit challenges two other state policies as well: one is a
year-old law banning Mexican consulate identity cards ? but not those
from any other country ? as valid identification in applying for
driver's licenses and state IDs.
The 25-page lawsuit also singles out state laws that leave it up to
individual law enforcement officers to decide what they'll accept as
proper ID; such laws are so ''vague'' they're unconstitutional.
Since the new law went into effect, police departments have said they
will decide individually whether officers will accept certificates as
ID when issuing citations for traffic and other minor offenses. Police
can take someone into custody for lacking proper ID. That, according
to Gonzalez, is contrary to a Supreme Court ruling that says police
and the public need guidelines about what ID is acceptable.
The law ''doesn't tell us as residents of the state of Tennessee what
documents to carry that will satisfy Tennessee police officers,''
Gonzalez said. ''We won't know until officer A stops us and tells us
and then police officer B stops us and he tells us something else.''
The suit also calls Department of Safety staff poorly trained,
inadequately supervised and says that incidents such as the one with
Gurdian ? who ultimately had her passport returned ? were not
adequately investigated. It also accuses the Department of Safety of
violating federal law and risking federal dollars by not providing
interpreters at testing stations.
Yesterday a Department of Safety spokeswoman refused to comment on
their interpreter policy, their policy regarding minor children, the
training of their staff or their policy on confiscating documents,
citing the pending lawsuit.
The suit will go next before a judge, but no date has yet been set.
Time line of driver's license laws
May 2001: Former Gov. Don Sundquist signs driver's license law
eliminating requirements for a Social Security number to get either a
Tennessee license or ID.
May 2003: State bans use of Mexican consulate-issued card called
''matricula consular'' in applying for driver's licenses.
May 29, 2004: New driver's license law goes partially into effect,
requiring either proof of citizenship or legal permanent immigration
status to get a driver's license.
July 1, 2004: State begins to issue driving certificates.
July 12, 2004: Federal lawsuit filed seeking to overturn license law.
The interesting part of this article is this:
The policy creates two types of driving documents: driver's licenses
for those who can prove they're either citizens or legal permanent
residents, and driving certificates for those who can't. Stamped ''not
valid for identification,'' certificates are intended to be used only
for driving and not to board a plane, buy a gun or rent a car,
according to policy-makers.
A "driving certificate" would allow a person to drive even though it
is not a legal ID. If your intent is to have legal driving privileges,
then Tennessee might be just the ticket (no pun intended). If you want
a real driver's license, then I would recommend Idaho or Oregon. You
might have to give them a bogus SSN, but I assume you are already
using one anyway. You should have a much easier life from now on
because Bush will probably win another term as president:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/100304dnediprez4latin.2fcab712.html
Picking the President: Bush more engaged with Latin America
Why should the two major presidential candidates ? not to mention, the
folks living here in North Texas ? care about what goes on in Latin
America? Simple answer: Because what goes on in your neighborhood
affects you. On issues ranging from trade to immigration to drugs,
what happens in Latin America affects the United States.
Whenever the Mexican economy hits a rough spot, immigrants stream into
the United States in greater numbers. According to Colombia's
ambassador to the United States, his country is responsible for 80
percent of the cocaine consumed in the United States. When U.S.
workers complain about unfair trade practices and the outsourcing of
jobs, it is Latin American nations that often wind up front and center
in the debate.
So how do John Kerry and President Bush compare with respect to their
policies, priorities and perspectives toward Latin America?
Mr. Bush got off to an encouraging start, in 2001, by building on his
relationship with Mexican President Vicente Fox and kicking off
negotiations for an immigration accord. And in Peru, the Bush
administration applauded the ascension to the presidency of
Stanford-educated economist Alejandro Toledo after former President
Alberto Fujimori fled in disgrace.
Then came Sept. 11, 2001, and the administration turned its attention
elsewhere. When Argentina's economy collapsed, the United States ? and
much of the world ? decided that the situation was too fluid to simply
throw more foreign aid at Buenos Aires. And with regard to those
countries in whose affairs the White House did maintain interest ?
like Cuba and Venezuela ? the approach was often to try to swat
mosquitoes with cannon fire.
Lately, according to Roger Noriega, the U.S. assistant secretary of
state for Latin America, the administration has been rebuilding its
relationship with the region. Mr. Bush has not stopped trying to drum
up support for a new immigration accord with Mexico. And Mr. Noriega
says the administration is even helping Argentina dig itself out of
its financial crisis.
If only Mr. Kerry seemed as interested in Latin America. Listen to his
speeches. Read his press releases. You'll have a tough time finding
any evidence that he's given much thought to this part of the world.
Our fear is that, like many Eastern politicians, Mr. Kerry's foreign
policy expertise is of the trans-Atlantic variety, that when he hears
the phrase "foreign affairs," his gaze immediately fixes on Europe.
Perhaps that is just as well. On those rare occasions when he has
turned his attention to Latin American priorities ? say, trade ? his
views have been indecipherable. Mr. Kerry voted for the North American
Free Trade Agreement, and yet when his campaign for the presidency
took him to union-friendly states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and
Ohio, he blasted the agreement. In fact, he said, if elected
president, he would push to renegotiate NAFTA and all existing trade
pacts.
That sort of flip-flopping is not likely to play any better in Latin
America than it does here at home.
Mr. Bush has a steadier hand. Once he focuses on an issue, his resolve
is never in doubt. That trait will serve him well in dealing with
Latin America in a second term. This is a complicated part of the
world. Yet Americans have no choice but to be fully engaged. President
Bush is the better candidate when it comes to dealing with our
neighbors to the south.
This leads me to believe that things will only get better for illegals
residing in the USA. However, I believe that if this policy continues
(and I see no reason that it will change) the reason for illegals
entering the USA will not be quite as attractive. Our poor economic
outlook combined with an exploding population will surely make the job
market here tough for everyone. Also the abuse of our free services is
taking a toll on tax payers:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/08/26/MNG478ECAM1.DTL
Group's study says illegals not paying their way
Taxes gleaned from undocumented workers said to be less than cost of
services they use
Illegal immigrants use more in federal services than they contribute
in federal taxes, according to a report released yesterday by the
Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C., group that favors
strict limits on immigration.
The report estimates that illegal immigrants paid roughly $7 billion a
year in federal taxes in 2002, largely by using falsified Social
Security numbers, but cost the government almost $10 billion more than
that in Medicaid, food assistance programs, use of prisons and courts
and federal aid to education.
The report also found that if the roughly 9 million undocumented
immigrants currently in the country were given legal status, the drain
on the federal budget would grow to nearly $29 billion.
"The costs increase dramatically because unskilled immigrants with
legal status, which is what most illegal aliens would become, can
access government programs but still tend to make very modest tax
payments," said the study's author Steven Camarota.
The study drew swift criticism from immigrant advocates and many
scholars who said it was an oversimplified portrait that didn't
capture the many ways immigrants, including those who are in the
United States illegally, contributed to the country's economic
vitality.
"From my point of view, they're looking through the wrong end of the
telescope," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National
Immigration Forum in Washington. "They're taking a group of people who
do essential work in agriculture and service industries and taking a
narrow look at taxes that can be documented and costs that can be
documented. It doesn't capture the larger economic effects."
Sharry conceded that low-wage immigrant workers paid little in taxes
relative to U.S. workers with higher skills but said their work
subsidized the cost of things such as farm produce and child care for
two-income professional families.
If a legalization program were put in place to allow more immigrants
to live in the United States legally, he argued, those immigrants
would improve their English and job skills and have greater bargaining
power and so would eventually earn more and contribute more in taxes.
It appears that the best solution would be for all illegals to pursue
legal status and participate in all the benefits afforded to real
Americans. Of course there are a few drawbacks to that such as taxes,
social security payments, voting, and all the other little things that
make living in the good old USA such a pleasure.
I hope that all this helps you in your pursuit of living the American
Dream (a vanishing ghost of yesterday). |
Clarification of Answer by
redhoss-ga
on
04 Oct 2004 06:19 PDT
These websites have much information and help:
http://www.usimmigrationsupport.org/
http://www.legaladviceforfree.com/immigration.html?engine=gog&id=immigration
New York Attorneys
You can locate a lawyer in New York by contacing a lawyer referral
service. Legal Advice for Free has included a list of lawyer referral
services in New York.
New York State Bar Association LRIS
Albany, NY
(800)342-3661
(518)487-5909
(518)463-3200x5709
(518)487-5682 (TTY)
except for counties with a Local LRIS
Dutchess County Bar Association LRS
Poughkeepsie, NY
(914)473-7941
(914)473-2488
Dutchess County
Erie County Bar Association LRS
Buffalo, NY
(716)852-3100
Erie County
Brooklyn Bar Association LRS
Brooklyn, NY
(718)624-0843
(718)624-0675
Kings, Manhattan, Queens, Bronx and Richmond
Association of the Bar of the City of New York LRS
New York, NY
(212)626-7373
(212)626-7374 (Spanish)
New York, Kings, Brooklyn, Queens, Bronx, Staten Island
Onondaga County Bar Association LRS
Syracuse, NY
(315)471-2690
Onondaga County
Orange County Bar Association LRS
Goshen, NY
(914)294-8222
Orange County
Putnam County Bar Association LRS
Carmel, NY
(914)225-4904
Putnam, Dutchess in NY, and Westchester in CT
Queens County Bar Association LRS
Jamaica, NY
(718)291-4500
Queens, New York City and Long Island
Rensselaer County Bar Association LRS
Troy, NY
(518)272-7220
Rensselaer County
Richmond County Bar Association LRS
Staten Island, NY
(718)442-4500
Richmond County
Rockland County Bar Association LRS
New City, NY
(845)634-2149
Rockland County
Suffolk County Bar Association LRIS
Hauppage, NY
(516)234-5577
Suffolk County
Sullivan County Bar Association LRIS
Monticello, NY
(914)794-2426
Sullivan County
Warren County Bar Association LRS
Glens Falls, NY
(518)792-9239
Warren, Washington, Saratoga, and Essex Counties
Westchester County Bar Association LRS
White Plains, NY
(914)761-5151
Westchester County
http://www.nycclc.org/immigration.asp
The mission of the Commission on the Dignity of Immigrants is to
champion the rights of all immigrants regardless of status. Through
our partnership with the archdiocese of New York and our growing
referral network, we draw upon our resources to aid immigrants facing
any type of social and legislative concerns both in and out of the
workplace. We want to ensure that all working families live and work
in dignity and receive their fair share in achieving the American
dream.
Contact:
Jean Kim, Director of the Commission, can be
reached at the Council, 212-604-9552.
http://www.pubadvocate.nyc.gov/your_guide/civilrights/discrimination_immigrants.shtml
New York Immigration Hotline
The New York Immigration Hotline, operated by Victim Services,
provides confidential assistance to immigrants.
multi-lingual
(800) 232-0212
I believe that you can find the help you need with this information.
Good luck in your pursuit of becoming legal, Redhoss
|
