PDA

View Full Version : I've heard you don't have to get a SSN for your kid when they are born...?




Reason
10-21-2011, 12:00 AM
But that it can be difficult & that the hospitals will fight you on it.

Anyone have some links to more info on this topic?

donnay
10-21-2011, 12:10 AM
http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/YourRightsAndSSNs.htm
http://www.dailypaul.com/53103/warningdo-not-get-your-newborns-social-security-numbers
http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/scarmig/scarmig1.html

james1844
10-21-2011, 12:13 AM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.

Reason
10-21-2011, 12:16 AM
http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/YourRightsAndSSNs.htm
http://www.dailypaul.com/53103/warningdo-not-get-your-newborns-social-security-numbers
http://www.strike-the-root.com/3/scarmig/scarmig1.html

wow, that first link is some fantastic reading....!

Reason
10-21-2011, 12:16 AM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.

no doubt

Danke
10-21-2011, 12:46 AM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.

Yes, freedom is sooo inconvenient.

Czolgosz
10-21-2011, 12:49 AM
Maybe the question should be, why do I need a SS number?

Reason
10-21-2011, 12:53 AM
Yes, freedom is sooo inconvenient.

Very true.

Usually worth it.

Keith and stuff
10-21-2011, 12:57 AM
Maybe the question should be, why do I need a SS number?

But you don't :)

Czolgosz
10-21-2011, 12:58 AM
But you don't :)

Spoken like somebody who lives in a freer State. :p

Danke
10-21-2011, 12:58 AM
Maybe the question should be, why do I need a SS number?

If you want a government job or benefit, you'll need one.

heavenlyboy34
10-21-2011, 01:01 AM
If you want a government job or benefit, you'll need one.
If illegal aliens can get benefits without a verifiable SSN, surely we shouldn't have to!

heavenlyboy34
10-21-2011, 01:03 AM
Yes, freedom is sooo inconvenient.
Very true. ;)

Czolgosz
10-21-2011, 01:20 AM
In NH, if you'd liked to drive a car under the UCC you'll need a license. The primary documents required to get a license all require (afaik) a SS number to obtain, which means you need a SS number somewhere along the line to get a UCC approved NH driver's license. Source: http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/dmv/driverlic/documents/required_doc.pdf

Of course I'm with the school of thought that as long as you don't sign a contract with the state that your Constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness isn't revoked once you close the car door. Take the Carl Miller and Michael Badnarik youtube courses.

What else? Bank accounts; there are arguments you may use to acquire an account. Here's one reference, but there are many others: http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Victories/bank_ssn.htm

Danke mentions government jobs, but what about private companies?

Czolgosz
10-21-2011, 01:24 AM
If illegal aliens can get benefits without a verifiable SSN, surely we shouldn't have to!

Re: illegals, google ITIN. I glanced at the required form, you could probably get one into the system w/ relative ease.

Yieu
10-21-2011, 01:51 AM
Maybe the question should be, why do I need a SS number?

Unfortunately, if you want a private market job or any job at all, you will need one. It does not make logical or moral sense, but unfortunately most if not nearly all jobs will not hire without one.

CaptainAmerica
10-21-2011, 01:56 AM
thank you Franklin D ROOSEVELT......for national id,and tax tracking system.

A Son of Liberty
10-21-2011, 03:51 AM
The Amish around here get along quite well enough without one.

Of course, they seem to get along quite well enough without a lot of things.

darkstar725
10-21-2011, 05:50 AM
Neither myself nor my brother or sister had one until I was about 13...My older brother had to get one to get a driver's license I think, so we all got them then.

apex
10-21-2011, 06:28 AM
SSN is very convenient. Need credit to buy a car or house?

mrsat_98
10-21-2011, 06:29 AM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.

I am not having any problems


no doubt


Maybe the question should be, why do I need a SS number?

So that GovCo can identify you as an individual affected by taxes, public benifits, drivers license laws and motor vehicle registration laws. see 42 USC 405(c)(2)(C)(i).


In NH, if you'd liked to drive a car under the UCC you'll need a license. The primary documents required to get a license all require (afaik) a SS number to obtain, which means you need a SS number somewhere along the line to get a UCC approved NH driver's license. Source: http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/dmv/driverlic/documents/required_doc.pdf



Of course I'm with the school of thought that as long as you don't sign a contract with the state that your Constitutional right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness isn't revoked once you close the car door. Take the Carl Miller and Michael Badnarik youtube courses.

What else? Bank accounts; there are arguments you may use to acquire an account. Here's one reference, but there are many others: http://www.greaterthings.com/News/Victories/bank_ssn.htm

Danke mentions government jobs, but what about private companies?

If they require a SSN they are government jobs or at very least the entity you would work for is brainwashed into thinking it is a government job.


Unfortunately, if you want a private market job or any job at all, you will need one. It does not make logical or moral sense, but unfortunately most if not nearly all jobs will not hire without one.

I am not having any issues about no SSN.


ssnumber in English Gematria Equals: 666 ( s114 s114 n84 u126 m78 b12 e30 r108 )

Enforcer
10-21-2011, 06:35 AM
If illegal aliens can get benefits without a verifiable SSN, surely we shouldn't have to!

First off, undocumented foreigners are not illegal aliens. That is clearly a racist term. Secondly, it was made illegal for undocumented foreigners to get entitlements way back in 1996 and under the REAL ID Act, the agencies dispensing aid are required, by law, to verify all Socialist Surveillance Numbers... ooops, "Social Security Numbers."

Enforcer
10-21-2011, 06:54 AM
You do not need a Socialist Surveillance Number...ooops, "Social Security Number." Yeah, without it, you cannot get credit, get government benefits and many companies will not hire you.

It is certainly more convenient, but Benjamin Franklin best addressed this when he said: "He would give up essential Liberty for the promise of temporary Safety, deserves neither Liberty nor Safety."

The Socialist Surveillance Number is now your de facto National ID number. It is a tool of tyranny AND it is the most common method identity thieves steal your ID and prying eyes get all your personal information. Your medical records, dental records, financial transactions, educational records, criminal records, etc., etc. are all tied to one universal number. Give it up to someone and they can exploit it to get all kinds of information on you.

There will always be the majority that will go along to get along, but even if they don't have the cahones to distance themselves from Hitler's tattoo idea on steroids, you would think they would be supportive of those who have given up the SSN.

On my mother's ssn, it plainly states "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" right across the face. Before Socialist Security became law, those who opposed it were concerned that we would get to this very point in history. The original intent was to NEVER use the Socialist Security Number for ID.

This is an issue where the conservatives blame the Democrats, but Socialist Security came about with significant Republican support. The Socialist Security Act passed the House of Representatives 372 to 33 and in the Senate by a vote of 77 to 6. Furthermore, every time the Republicans have had an opportunity to get rid of Socialist Security, they haven't.

If you keep your SSN after researching this, at the very least have the common sense to NEVER, EVER give it out to private entities for ID. And while it is easier to go along to get along, one only need to follow the history of events with this kind of ID and think about Hitler's war against the Jews. The same arguments and the same rhetoric are being used by socialists to get you to keep and use your SSN. I urge you to join the fight against it.

CJLauderdale4
10-21-2011, 07:16 AM
Like it says on the family guardian site, you can refuse to complete the forms at the hospital. I've done this ... the nurses keep urging... but they really don't care.

If you want to claim your child on health insurance and tax returns... you can get the child a tax id number. However just like h1 workers..the child will pay social security taxes when older just not be eligible for the benefits.

KCIndy
10-21-2011, 07:25 AM
....the child will pay social security taxes when older just not be eligible for the benefits.


Not a problem. The entire system will be belly up by then.

specsaregood
10-21-2011, 07:40 AM
First off, undocumented foreigners are not illegal aliens. That is clearly a racist term.
Not so clear, what race is an "illegal alien"? Is it one of those short skinny grey guys? Let me know, I'd sure like to know I'm insulting the right race of people everytime I say "illegal alien".

Danke
10-21-2011, 08:49 AM
Not so clear, what race is an "illegal alien"? Is it one of those short skinny grey guys? Let me know, I'd sure like to know I'm insulting the right race of people everytime I say "illegal alien".

I think illegal aliens are the ones that come from outside our galaxy without permission.

Danke
10-21-2011, 09:00 AM
Not a problem. The entire system will be belly up by then.


You are supposed to be sleeping in.

LibForestPaul
10-21-2011, 06:43 PM
First off, undocumented foreigners are not illegal aliens. That is clearly a racist term. Secondly, it was made illegal for undocumented foreigners to get entitlements way back in 1996 and under the REAL ID Act, the agencies dispensing aid are required, by law, to verify all Socialist Surveillance Numbers... ooops, "Social Security Numbers."

BULL! I have paper work from county agencies with programs that dole out money that specifically state documentation not required, try again.

Keith and stuff
10-21-2011, 07:17 PM
In NH, if you'd liked to drive a car under the UCC you'll need a license. The primary documents required to get a license all require (afaik) a SS number to obtain, which means you need a SS number somewhere along the line to get a UCC approved NH driver's license. Source: http://www.nh.gov/safety/divisions/dmv/driverlic/documents/required_doc.pdf

That is mostly correct but you technically don't need a license to drive a car in NH. NH doesn't have a learner's permit system. So when a person is learning to drive, he don't have a learner's permit or a license. However, he must travel "with a licensed adult 25 years or older in the front passenger seat."
http://www.dmv.org/nh-new-hampshire/teen-drivers.php

osan
10-21-2011, 08:01 PM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.

Now there's an attitude rooted in a love of liberty.

Why not join CPUSA and dispense with the pretenses? Or the Democrats.

Enforcer
10-21-2011, 08:02 PM
BULL! I have paper work from county agencies with programs that dole out money that specifically state documentation not required, try again.

Presuming that is so, you are talking about COUNTY agencies. IF those agencies are federal means tested, undocumented immigrants are not entitled to the money. Having read most of the studies, no national consensus can be arrived at with respect to what individual counties do; however, it is not a NATIONAL issue (which is what this board addresses.) Here are some facts you should look into:

"In a report last year, the Congressional Research Service outlined the benefits that are available to immigrants. It states quite plainly: “Unauthorized aliens (often referred to as illegal aliens) are not eligible for most federal benefits, regardless of whether they are means tested, with notable exceptions for emergency services.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/tampa-debate-leftover-perry-and-illegal-immigrants/2011/09/14/gIQAf5m6RK_bl

Also see the following:

http://reason.org/news/show/122411.html


http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/cost-of-illegal-immigrants/

Enforcer
10-21-2011, 08:03 PM
Now there's an attitude rooted in a love of liberty.

Why not join CPUSA and dispense with the pretenses? Or the Democrats.

Great post. Thank you.

acptulsa
10-21-2011, 08:03 PM
I didn't get one until I got my first job. Got by fifteen years without one, and came out just fine thank you.

They didn't pass any federal laws to the contrary since then, either. I'd have noticed.

heavenlyboy34
10-21-2011, 08:08 PM
First off, undocumented foreigners are not illegal aliens. That is clearly a racist term. Secondly, it was made illegal for undocumented foreigners to get entitlements way back in 1996 and under the REAL ID Act, the agencies dispensing aid are required, by law, to verify all Socialist Surveillance Numbers... ooops, "Social Security Numbers."
uhhhh, no. The term has been around for many, many decades. It's the term "undocumented foreigner"/"undocumented alien" that have only been coined in recent years.

illegal alien 

noun 1.a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

acptulsa
10-21-2011, 08:17 PM
That is clearly a racist term.

Excuse me? How could that possibly be racist when clearly that could be a person of any race whatsoever?

ghengis86
10-21-2011, 08:18 PM
They tried to sign my son up automatically at the hospital. We refused to check the box on some form they had us fill out. A few days later, got a letter in the mail that they signed him up anyway. I called and told them to check the form; sure enough, she says, the box us not checked. They canceled the request and my son does but have a SSN.

Can't claim a child exemption on taxes without an SSN (I tried and even sent a copy if the birth cert: denied). Father in law couldn't open a cleve savings plan in my sons name so we just made it a custodial account. Other than that, no problems. When my son is old enough to make his own descions, he can choose to get one if he wants. In all likelihood, he probably will. But I'll let him decide.

Aden
10-21-2011, 08:53 PM
They tried to sign my son up automatically at the hospital. We refused to check the box on some form they had us fill out. A few days later, got a letter in the mail that they signed him up anyway. I called and told them to check the form; sure enough, she says, the box us not checked. They canceled the request and my son does but have a SSN.

Can't claim a child exemption on taxes without an SSN (I tried and even sent a copy if the birth cert: denied). Father in law couldn't open a cleve savings plan in my sons name so we just made it a custodial account. Other than that, no problems. When my son is old enough to make his own descions, he can choose to get one if he wants. In all likelihood, he probably will. But I'll let him decide.


We had our kid at home. Midwife mailed form into state for the birth certificate, and the idiots at state got us a SSN from the feds even though we put no on the form. I was pissed off when we got the card in the mail when he was three-weeks-old. I researched online and found out that if you never use the SSN, and the hospital (or in my case the state) signs you up, you can fill out paperwork to take to social security to get rid of the number. However, the number is not truly deleted and it is impossible to sever your kid from the number. Trust me, I searched diligently, spent hours at the social security office, and went round and round with them on the phone.

What we ended up doing, since they probably laughed off and threw away our forms asking to get rid of the number, is just shredded the card and threw it in the trash. I have no idea what it is and we do not plan to use it. We are going to homeschool and do not claim him on taxes, even know we ate $3 grand in returns last year. Whatever. I'm just trying to make it as easy as possible for him to be off the radar in case that is what he wants when he is older.

Danke
10-21-2011, 08:56 PM
We had our kid at home. Midwife mailed form into state for the birth certificate, and the idiots at state got us a SSN from the feds even though we put no on the form. I was pissed off when we got the card in the mail when he was three-weeks-old. I researched online and found out that if you never use the SSN, and the hospital (or in my case the state) signs you up, you can fill out paperwork to take to social security to get rid of the number. However, the number is not truly deleted and it is impossible to sever your kid from the number. Trust me, I searched diligently, spent hours at the social security office, and went round and round with them on the phone.

What we ended up doing, since they probably laughed off and threw away our forms asking to get rid of the number, is just shredded the card and threw it in the trash. I have no idea what it is and we do not plan to use it. We are going to homeschool and do not claim him on taxes, even know we ate $3 grand in returns last year. Whatever. I'm just trying to make it as easy as possible for him to be off the radar in case that is what he wants when he is older.

No big deal. It is not your or your kids number. It belongs to the State and is assigned to the Corporate Person.

It ain't you.

Czolgosz
10-21-2011, 09:14 PM
That is mostly correct but you technically don't need a license to drive a car in NH. NH doesn't have a learner's permit system. So when a person is learning to drive, he don't have a learner's permit or a license. However, he must travel "with a licensed adult 25 years or older in the front passenger seat."
http://www.dmv.org/nh-new-hampshire/teen-drivers.php

Technically don't need one, i.e. Constitutionally? Do people get harassed and or jailed for not having one (and like not having a license plate)? If a person wants to live as a sovereign in New Hampshire will he be able to find adequate employment and housing? (I'll study more at the FSP web site)



This isn't directed toward you, but do the Amish succumb to identification numbers and penalties? Do they have allodial title to their land? etc.

muh_roads
10-21-2011, 09:20 PM
Isn't needing to report an SSN to get a job just as unconstitutional as something like Obamacare?

aGameOfThrones
10-21-2011, 09:46 PM
uhhhh, no. The term has been around for many, many decades. It's the term "undocumented foreigner"/"undocumented alien" that have only been coined in recent years.

illegal alien 

noun 1.a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

To add...

Legal definition:

Alien. A foreigner; one born abroad.

A person who owes allegiance to a foreign government. De Cano v. State, 7 Wash.2d 613,110 P.2d 627, 631, 633.

In this country is a person born not of the United States and unnaturalized under our Constitution and laws, 2 Kent, Comm. 50. Caparell v. Goodbody, 132 N.JEq. 559, 29 A.2d 563, 569.

Black's law 4th edition.

Keith and stuff
10-22-2011, 12:19 AM
Technically don't need one, i.e. Constitutionally? Do people get harassed and or jailed for not having one (and like not having a license plate)? If a person wants to live as a sovereign in New Hampshire will he be able to find adequate employment and housing? (I'll study more at the FSP web site)

People that are learning to drive in NH don't need a DL as long as someone 25 years or older with a DL is in the passenger seat. However, if you had a DL in the past but don't currently have one and the cops find out about it, they may be able to do something. I don't really recommend that method of driving and I wouldn't be surprised if someone was harassed by cops if the cops found out about the issue. If someone was pulled over the told the cops that they are a sovereign, it might not end well. If someone was pulled over and said they were be taught how to drive, it would likely end fine. http://www.dmv.org/nh-new-hampshire/teen-drivers.php

It's pretty easy to find housing in NH (likely most places?) if you don't have a social security number. Just have a roommate that is on the lease. I'm at my 3rd place since moving to NH and I've done it every time without a problem. I've never had to go through a background check or even sign a lease. Even families can do this. I live with a pro-liberty family right now.

As for employment, there is a chance you could find a traditional employer that breaks the rules for you. You could work in the black or grey market. You could also be your own boss (sales, construction, yard work, snow removal, consulting, reporter...)

Honestly, I recommend against trying to live without a social security number. It seems like it would be too much work for too little reward. However, if someone wants to do, more power to them :)

Jake Ralston
10-22-2011, 12:47 AM
Look, its a huge pain in the ass if you don't have one.


Yes, freedom is sooo inconvenient.

Okay wiseguy, so I'm assuming you've already put your money where your mouth is and abandoned your SSN?

LOL you must be living in a trailer, using candlelight by night and drinking filtered piss in place of water.

Wait a sec, are you the Ungrip guy, or just a poser???

ghengis86
10-22-2011, 06:33 AM
Okay wiseguy, so I'm assuming you've already put your money where your mouth is and abandoned your SSN?

LOL you must be living in a trailer, using candlelight by night and drinking filtered piss in place of water.

Wait a sec, are you the Ungrip guy, or just a poser???

To some, that may be an agreeable alternative to being a ward of the state.

LibertyEagle
10-22-2011, 10:52 AM
Unfortunately, if you want a private market job or any job at all, you will need one. It does not make logical or moral sense, but unfortunately most if not nearly all jobs will not hire without one.

That may be true with the Patriot Act, but it didn't used to be the case. I learned this as an employer when an applicant refused to provide their SSN. I checked with Human Resources and found out, nope, they didn't have to.

pcosmar
10-22-2011, 10:57 AM
That may be true with the Patriot Act, but it didn't used to be the case. I learned this as an employer when an applicant refused to provide their SSN. I checked with Human Resources and found out, nope, they didn't have to.


When I lived under an alias, I just made one up.

Enforcer
10-22-2011, 03:30 PM
uhhhh, no. The term has been around for many, many decades. It's the term "undocumented foreigner"/"undocumented alien" that have only been coined in recent years.

illegal alien 

noun 1.a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

You did not leave a proper cite; however, if you will research the term "illegal alien / immigrant" you will NOT find it to be very old. Actually, it could not have factually been invented until AFTER the Kennedy Immigration Laws of the 1960s - kind of gives us an indication of which side of the fence you sit on (ugh... another closet Democrat.)

Here's what is wrong with the term, sir.

In the definition, it clearly states that it refers to someone who enters the United States unlawfully.

The word unlawful is defined as:

"That which is contrary to prohibited, or unauthorized by law. That which is not lawful. The acting contrary to, or in defiance of the law; disobeying or disregarding the law..." (Black's Law Dictionary)


The word "illegal" is much different. In order for an action to be "illegal," it must contain an element of criminality. Defying the law is perfectly legal. Disobeying and disregarding the law are not crimes:

"The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statue, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.

An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed. Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.

Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it . . .

A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one.

An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law.

Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.

No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."

-- Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)

If you do not obey an unconstitutional law, it may be unlawful; however since no criminal penalties attach, it most assuredly is not "illegal."

Continuing on, Attorney General Michael Mukasey (appointed by George W. Bush) told the American Bar Association:

“Not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime,”

http://lawyersusadcdicta.wordpress.com/2008/08/13/mukasey-%E2%80%98not-every-violation-of-the-law-is-a-crime/

What you are advocating on this board is a Democrat / liberal interpretation of the law. No serious, strict constructionist would ever support it. If we create a precedent contrary to what Mukasey said, then you would lose the Right to disobey unconstitutional laws. Immigration violations are found in Title 8 of the United States Code and they deal with CIVIL law, not criminal law. Again, you're taking an Obama view of the laws in this country and making disobedience a crime. It may be unlawful to disobey unconstitutional civil laws, but it is NEVER a crime.

Enforcer
10-22-2011, 03:39 PM
Okay wiseguy, so I'm assuming you've already put your money where your mouth is and abandoned your SSN?

LOL you must be living in a trailer, using candlelight by night and drinking filtered piss in place of water.

Wait a sec, are you the Ungrip guy, or just a poser???

FWIW, My father died three years ago. At the time he died, he had not paid federal income taxes nor used an ssn for at least 17 years that I can personally attest to.

The old man was pissed at my mother and took it out on the whole family, leaving his 2 MILLION DOLLAR estate to malcontents, drunks, and drug addicts. The money was paid out and most of those people blew their good fortunes in short order. We have much richer relatives, but the old man did not live in a trailer and from what I could tell, he ate whatever in the heck he wanted to.

heavenlyboy34
10-22-2011, 03:43 PM
What you are advocating on this board is a Democrat / liberal interpretation of the law.
Nope. I just use dictionaries. You can use specialized dictionaries to fit your argument if you want, but I generally prefer to use the English language properly.

Enforcer
10-22-2011, 07:00 PM
Nope. I just use dictionaries. You can use specialized dictionaries to fit your argument if you want, but I generally prefer to use the English language properly.

The most authoritative and accepted legal dictionary in the legal community is Black's Law Dictionary. If I were using "specialized" dictionaries, they would be something like Cokes or Ballentines.

I'm guessing you don't have much legal knowledge. So, allow me to prove, unequivocally, that your position is a liberal / Democrat position. You clearly believe that coming into the United States is a crime. Well, crimes are tried in criminal courts. I've told you that immigration is not criminal, it is civil. If you are tried in a criminal court, you and I both know that the Miranda warnings let an accused know, "you have the Right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you." Crimes = criminal process.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey RULED:

"I conclude, as have a growing number of federal courts, that the Constitution does not confer a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings," ... The reason is simple: Under Supreme Court precedent, there is no constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel under the Due Process Clause or any other provision where -- as here and as in most civil proceedings -- there is no constitutional right to counsel, including Government-appointed counsel, in the first place."

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/01/mukasey-aliens-have-no-right-to-effective-assistance.html

So, if you're charged with a crime, you are guaranteed representation by an attorney; however, if you violate a civil statute, no crime has been committed.

When Obama came to power, he appointed Eric Holder in Mukasey's stead. Holder reversed the Mukasey decision, giving undocumented immigrants a court appointed attorney in civil immigration proceedings. In DEBEATHAM v. HOLDER, No. 09-0205-ag. argued in April of 2010, Holder reversed Mukasey:

http://www.civilrighttocounsel.org/advances/other/

In essence, Holder gave potentially 12 MILLION undocumented immigrants a court appointed attorney for a civil infraction of the law. It really sets a piss poor precedent and the government doesn't like to pursue these civil infractions due to their cost. You are still taking a liberal / Democrat position.

Bear in mind, before the anti - immigrant lobby got so powerful, Attorney General Michael Mukasey told the American Bar Association (the most liberal - communist loving organization in America):

"Not every wrong, or even every violation of the law, is a crime."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/12/justice-staffers-wont-be_n_118423.html

So, get yourself a Black's Law Dictionary and study up on the differences between civil law and criminal law. Deportations are not a criminal process. They are clearly a civil administrative procedure for a violation of a civil statute (i.e. 8 USC 1325.)

I've mentioned this before, heavenlyboy34, I worked in immigration law for six years and came from the same side you're on. I had 13 years experience from YOUR side of the fence (working in politics) before having to work on the other side of the aisle and learning the whole subject over again from a legal perspective. Once again, I assure you: a general dictionary has no citing authority in any court whereas Black's Law Dictionary does. But, I urge you to study the differences between civil law / process / procedure and criminal law / process / procedure.

TheBlackPeterSchiff
10-22-2011, 07:20 PM
If you could get by w/0 an SSN you will live a very free life, but very inconvenient.

Danke
10-22-2011, 08:20 PM
//

mrsat_98
10-23-2011, 07:18 AM
Isn't needing to report an SSN to get a job just as unconstitutional as something like Obamacare?

Legally a job working for a corp is supposed to request a SSN at least twice and if they don't get it they are to put an affidavit in the file that says they requested it. There is no need for why they didn't get it just that they requested it. No affidavit on file subjects them to a $50 fine.





If you could get by w/0 an SSN you will live a very free life, but very inconvenient.

Its fun. I just have not started carrying tax exempt papers to Wal Mart yet.

osan
10-23-2011, 10:30 AM
Nope. I just use dictionaries. You can use specialized dictionaries to fit your argument if you want, but I generally prefer to use the English language properly.

Black's Law Dictionary IS the proper use of the English language in the context of legal practice. I am not at all confident that a court will hold with you if perchance your common definitions of terms vary even in the most modest ways and degrees with that of Black's. I may be wrong on this point, but do not think I am.