Legal

I Beg Your Pardon, I Promised You A Stonegarden.

MayorBob.

Posted to Legal on Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 02:09:34 AM EST (promoted by port1080). RSS.

"Welcome to Otero County New Mexico" proclaims the county web site, mentioning that the county is proud home to Holloman Air Force Base.  But, while Otero County may be welcoming to F117 Nighthawks and F-22A Raptors, it's proven to be a bit less welcoming to people with Hispanic surnames.  At least that's the contention of two groups of plaintiffs in suits filed in federal court.  Both cases charge county officials with targeting Hispanics and violating the civil rights of legal residents and illegal immigrants during sheriff department operations this past summer.

Otero County is close to the Mexican border, and, as such, is a logical transit point for illegal immigrants from south of the border.  Border security is, of course, a subject of much concern.  Thus, the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced last year they were going to stuff border state coffers to combat illegal immigration under the aegis of Operation Stonegarden.  The more than (US)$1 million appropriated to New Mexico was supposed to "enhance coordination among state and federal law enforcement agencies at our borders."  Apparently, John Blansett, Otero County sheriff, managed to latch onto some bucks for his own operations. The infusion of cash allowed the sheriff to take an active stance in combating illegal immigration.  Only, according to the two suits filed, Otero sheriff deputies went beyond "active" into the area of "terrorizing."

What (pdf doc) the suits allege (pdf doc) is that, beginning this past summer, Blansett and his deputies conducted raids in the town of Chaparall.  During these raids, officers: "violently invaded homes without warrant", "stopped vehicles and pedestrians without cause", "assaulted and battered" suspects, and fabricated "violations or suspected violations of law" to justify racial profiling.  Ten plaintiffs in the first suit filed anonymously, fearing "violent retribution."  The second suit alleges the state-sponsored violence and constitutional violations reached "a new and unconscionable level this summer."  In both cases, it's alleged that officers used "a welter of lies, abuse, deceptions and fraud to enter homes, interrogate and arrest people."  The ACLU of New Mexico filed the first suit and director Peter Simonson said:

"The raids ... violated several basic guarantees that people who live in this country, regardless of their immigration status, are promised by the Constitution of the United States.  These raids are symptomatic of the same sort of reactionary policies that our government has been using to try and govern immigration over the last several decades."
The Border Network for Human Rights (BNHR), which filed the second suit, said it had turned its information over to Otero County in the hopes the matter could be resolved quickly and quietly.  Blansett and the Sheriff Department denied all allegations and aren't making public statements about the lawsuit.  Otero County attorney Dan Bryant said the county is studying the allegations and preparing a response.  Both suits allege violation of plaintiffs' Fourth and 14th Amendment rights.  While the ACLU suit dates the start of these actions when the county came by the federal Stonegarden funds, the BNHR suit alleges that the illegal actions began long before Sheriff Blansett received those monies.

Tags: edited by Port1080, written by MayorBob, illegal immigration, constitutional rights, civil rights (all tags)

This story: 18 comments (1 from subqueue)
Post a Comment
1

What's a little violence?

Lou.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:48:46 AM EST

5.00 (funny, funny)

We need strong borders.  And of course, you can't make an omelet without breaking some legs...errr, eggs.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

2

^ 1

I don't know this for sure.

MayorBob.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 08:12:12 AM EST

4.50 (astute, interesting)

But I'd be willing to bet that the sheriff of Otero County is an elective office.  According to what I read, approximately 40 percent of the people in Otero are classified as Hispanic.  You sort of have to wonder how many terms Sheriff Blansett figures he can get reelected when his record includes assaulting and battering 40 percent of the electorate.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

4

^ 2

Re: I don't know this for sure.

gerrymander.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 12:33:15 PM EST

5.00 (astute)

Depends on how pissed off the rest of the population is over illegal immigration, I reckon. If unbroken, 60% of the population is still plenty large enough to carry an election.

12

^ 4

Re: I don't know this for sure.

thefadd.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:11:23 PM EST

none

That's just so terribly astute of you to assume that the 40% of the population which is Hispanic are also illegal immigrants...

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

17

^ 12

Re: I don't know this for sure.

gerrymander.

Sat Oct 20, 2007 at 11:24:11 AM EST

none

I'm just following MayorBob's line of reasoning, thefadd. If you're not happy with the 40/60 breakdown, take it up with him.

10

^ 2

Re: I don't know this for sure.

zyxwvutsr.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 02:52:42 PM EST

none

...approximately 40 percent of the people in Otero are classified as Hispanic
Do you suppose it is a coincidence that several of the plaintiffs are under 18, but living with their families?

3

a simple question

DEMachina.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 08:46:14 AM EST

none

Is this the kind of country we want to become?

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

5

^ 3

Re: a simple question

gerrymander.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 12:41:31 PM EST

none

Is this the kind of country we want to become?

Not sure what you mean there, DEM. Care to elaborate?

7

^ 5

Just guessing

1fastdog.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 01:41:38 PM EST

5.00 (astute)

Is this the kind of country we want to become?

Not sure what you mean there, DEM. Care to elaborate?

I can't speak for exactly what DEM was getting at, though I suspect it's something along the lines of this (from the w/up)

"violently invaded homes without warrant", "stopped vehicles and pedestrians without cause", "assaulted and battered" suspects, and fabricated "violations or suspected violations of law" to justify racial profiling.

The behaviors mentioned above, if true, are abhorrent and not the kind of behavior from law enforcement that anyone should champion. Hence DEM's pondering on the subject. If they're gonna deport illegals, then there are guidelines for doing so in the appropriate manor without the need to go resort to the tactics outlined above.

Somewhere in my soul, there's always Rock -n- Roll... Joe Strummer

14

^ 7

Re: Just guessing

thefadd.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:24:03 PM EST

none

No kidding. Don't they know just to go down to Home Depot?

I'm not even joking really -- these people obviously just like to knock down doors and violate people's human rights. You can and should deport every illegal alien you can get your hands on. But there's no excuse for the un-American behavior these law enforcement officials have taken up.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

8

^ 5

Re: a simple question

DEMachina.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 01:52:42 PM EST

none

1fastdog pretty much nailed it.  Enforcing laws is one thing, having our own version of the gestapo something else.

Q: What do you think of western civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

9

^ 8

Re: a simple question

gerrymander.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 02:08:58 PM EST

none

Fair enough -- though I'd put a strong emphasis on the "if true" in 1fastdog's synopsis. I'm right with you on requiring professionalism and legal behavior from the police when enforcing law, but we've all had a sharp reminder about drawing conclusions from one side of the story with the Duke lacrosse team story.

15

^ 9

Re: a simple question

thefadd.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:27:17 PM EST

none

You're gonna hang onto that one for a long time, aren't you? Which one gets a longer statute of limitations--the fact that Bush stole the election or the fact that the Duke lacrosse team members only yelled the same racial epitaphs that got Don Imus fired?

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

18

^ 15

Re: a simple question

gerrymander.

Sat Oct 20, 2007 at 11:49:38 AM EST

none

You're gonna hang onto that one for a long time, aren't you?

It's not a small thing. Three innocent guys were charged with rape using phony testimony, gross prosecutorial misconduct, then to add insult to injury, tried and convicted in the court of opinion based on their race and social status. This is the kind of event is raw meat to progressive politics -- or would have been, if progressives hadn't included themselves among those building the metaphorical hangman's scaffold.

I don't know about you, but the lesson I took from that was the reminder, "try to examine all the facts before judging." All I'm saying here is: right now, we have half the story (and I'll post on that a bit later, when I've had time to read the complaint PDFs).

16

^ 9

Prosecutor -1, Rogue cops - ?

Lou.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 08:41:04 PM EST

none

Ok, there are probably lots of other prosecutors out there that are as much an idiot as Nifong...but I suspect that there are way more out of control cops by comparison these days.  I was going to post a couple of links for out of control cops, but there are too many to chose from.  Between Amadou Diallo, Abner Louima, the ever-lovable L/A police department, taser happy lads in blue...it's almost too much to take in.  It's like law enforcement in this country has become a case of bad cop/worse cop (or, in the case of Guliani's pal...Bad cop/Dirty Cop).

So, while it is almost always a good idea to see the weight of evidence, I'd bet dimes-to-donuts that we have yet another case of Cops Gone Wild.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

6

MALDEF

Steve Urkel.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 01:26:56 PM EST

none

MALDEF is a radical illegal alien activist group, with a history of filing bogus lawsuits, like the one where they sued various colleges for denying admission to illegal aliens. They also sued to get a college professor fired for questioning the Mexican racial agenda.

While the facts on this case haven't been determined yet, note that some of the plaintiffs are non-citizens who have already returned to Mexico

11

Dawning Realization

keta.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 05:14:32 PM EST

none

As time goes on, I'm beginning to realize just how eerily exact the choice of "Homeland Security," with all its xenophobic implications, really is.

13

^ 11

Re: Dawning Realization

thefadd.

Fri Oct 19, 2007 at 07:19:16 PM EST

none

it's just so endemic of the whole perverted mindset.

All I can think about are the apocalypse survivors in A Boy And His Dog sitting in their bunker waiving their American flags with red white and blue make-up on while singing "God Save America" when clearly nothing of the sort exists any longer for them. what a hideously accurate picture.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

This story: 18 comments (1 from subqueue)
Post a Comment