Gingrich Knows Illegals Break the Law

December 2nd, 2011 at 2:58 pm | 44 Comments |

| Print

Recent comments by Newt Gingrich to the effect that illegal immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for 25 years, remedy “obey the rules, have children and belong to a church” should be allowed to remain here are deliberately deceptive. His premise is that an illegal immigrant can somehow live and work in this country for a long period without breaking any laws. He should know better and probably does.

Gingrich voted for the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) in 1986 which requires employers and employees to sign a verification form at the time of hire indicating the employee is authorized for employment. Only U.S. citizens and certain classes of legal aliens are authorized for employment. The I-9 form, which must be used for each employee, requires the employee to produce two types of documents and swear under the penalty of perjury that the documents are authentic and relate to him or her. 8 U.S.C. sec. 1324a. The documents most commonly used are a social security card, to establish employment authorization, and a document with a photo, usually a drivers’ license, to establish the employee’s identity.

IRCA made the use of a document pertaining to someone else or a forged document on an I-9 form a felony. 18 U.S.C. sec. 1546. So someone who has entered the U.S. illegally cannot be authorized for employment. Perhaps if such a person were independently wealthy and had never been employed, it might be in our national interest to give that person amnesty and allow him or her to remain here for life. But how many illegal immigrants are independently wealthy and have never held a job? After all, IRCA makes it clear that employment opportunities are the magnet that draws the illegal immigrants here in the first place.

So a long-term illegal immigrant is likely to be a serial felon, a person who has used false social security cards to get employment many times and coupled the document fraud with perjury by signing the form, i.e., swearing to the authenticity of the documents, under oath. In a jurisdiction that really enforced IRCA, such people would be in federal prison. As one federal court aptly put it, “Illegal aliens are not ‘law-abiding citizens’ or members of the political community, and aliens who remain in this country illegally and without authorization are not Americans as that words is commonly understood.” United States v. Portillo-Munoz, _ F.3d _ (5th Cir. 2011).

Even apart from employment, it is very difficult to “play by the rules” in this country without a social security number. They are required on all tax returns. (Legally admitted aliens are given social security numbers.) So it is also quite likely that our long-term illegal immigrants are not filing tax returns, which is another felony. In short, it is not possible for illegal immigrants to live in this country without systematic, serial law breaking of a serious nature.

For a former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives not to know this (or President Obama, for that matter, who makes the same absurd comments about illegal immigrants “playing by the rules”), is unforgivable. More likely he knows these people are serial felons and is simply pandering for the approval of the editorial pages of the New York Times and other mainstream media.

At the very least, we should demand that any illegal immigrant seeking amnesty make a full confession of all their crimes, as with any plea bargain. They should be required to list every employer who hired them so that those employers can be investigated for IRCA violations, identify every person who provided them with false social security cards so those felons can be apprehended, and pay their back taxes with the same penalties and interest that would apply to an American citizen who failed to file returns for years. And I predict that if this deal were offered to the long-term illegals, they would rather self-deport than “play by the rules.”

Originally Posted at FosterPC

Recent Posts by Howard Foster

44 Comments so far ↓

  • bdtex

    Howard,you a perfect example of why the coming demographic perfect storm is gonna cause the GOP,as we now know it,to capsize and sink. GWB tried to save your party from it and Newt is trying to,but you guys wanna go for a swim.

  • TerryF98

    Idiocy on a pogo stick.

  • ottovbvs

    Of course illegal immigrants are breaking the law otherwise they wouldn’t be illegal immigrants would they? On the other hand laws are being being broken every day week on highways, in underage drinking, employers hiring illegals, and so forth. Foster with his narrow legalistic interpretations of this issue is living proof the law is an ass.

    • icarusr

      With respect, that a pedenatic moron decides to pick a pedantic point with Gingrich does not prove that “[if the law supposes that,] the law is a ass.” It just proves that the writer was a mediocre law students and is an even worse lawyer (or lawyer wanna be).

      • ottovbvs

        “the law is a ass”

        My irony relating to Foster esaped you…although as it happens I do believe the law is quite capable of being an ass. History is replete with examples; Prohibition being one such.

      • Rich T Bikkies

        Well done, icarusr. “The law is a ass”; not “an ass”. You know your Dickens. God be good to you!

        The intellectual level of posters is higher (though they are fewer) on FrumForum than on Huffington Post, my other main blog haunt. Non dignus sum: I suspect, uncomfortably, that I’m in the lower 50%. My punctuation skills are pretty damn good, though.

        The (few) exceptions to this on FrumForum are well known to us all.

        • ottovbvs

          I think “a ass ” is how it’s rendered in the original Oliver Twist although I have seen it rendered “an ass” too probably because Ass begins with a vowel and therefore it’s technically correct to use the indefinite article an. An Ass even if wrong also always seems to me more euphonious but I’ll defer to Mr Bumble. And btw I thought it was non sum dignus, I’ll have to ask my old lady who is somewhat addicted to incense.

  • Houndentenor

    You mean like you’d think Michele Bachmann would know that we don’t have diplomatic relations with Iran and haven’t for over 30 years? (Or that it might have occurred to her that suggesting that gay men could still legally marry so long as they marry women would cause laughter among anyone who has ever seen her husband.) And then there’s Herman Cain who doesn’t seem to know anything about policy or law or governing. This bunch is about as bright as the cast of Jersey Shore.

  • icarusr

    “So a long-term illegal immigrant is likely to be a serial felon,”

    I guess Romney had felons mowing his lawn. Wow. Rarely have I seen such pedantic idiocy so proudly advertised.

    • Houndentenor

      Notice how once again we conveniently ignore that illegal workers have ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS. There are two parties in that illegal act. One of which should be deported and the other jailed. Or maybe both deported. I’m fine either way. I’m sick of the hypocrisy on illegal immigration.

      • Rich T Bikkies

        Yes indeed. This would hit at some large corporate Republican donors, methinks, so they soft-pedal it.

        “Follow the money”. It never fails.

        • Houndentenor

          It’s not just corporations (although that’s part of it). When my right-wing idiot neighbors go pick up some day laborers in the Lowe’s parking lot, do you think they don’t suspect they aren’t legal to work in the US? In my experience, the same people who are ranting about illegals showing up in emergency rooms are the same ones hiring them to clear debris after storms and to take care of their kids and clean their houses.

  • Katie Fromage

    “Even apart from employment, it is very difficult to “play by the rules” in this country without a social security number. They are required on all tax returns.”


    Many illegal immigrants can and do file taxes using an alternative to the Social Security number offered by the IRS so it can collect income tax from foreign workers.

    • Frumplestiltskin

      yeah, exactly right. It is called an individual taxpayer identification number.

      ITINs are used by aliens who may or may not have the right to work in the US, such as aliens on temporary visas and non-resident aliens with US income.

      Massive Fail by Foster that he is unaware of this most basic of taxpayer id’s.

      • Probabilistic

        Is there an underlying assumption of legal presence (or, whatever is the correct technical jargon) in the US? The ITIN application form isn’t explicit but perhaps hints to it. ( See box 6c & 6d.

        Canadians and Mexicans entering the US, even legally, across land borders are unlikely to have those documents, but then again, if their intent is to work they should have some form of work visa.

        It would be interesting if someone can shed light on what happens in practice when applications are verified for eligibility/completeness.

  • drdredel

    If indeed your primary concern was the simple semantics of whether or not their actions are “legal”, thus making them “felons” then the much less onerous approach is to simply retroactively alter the law, making migration into this nation a process-free (and thus wholly allowable) act. So much simpler than your proposed (and idiotic) bureaucratic nightmare of tracking who’s been here, for how long, and whom they have worked for (“so that we can investigate them”).

    … “confession of their crimes…”
    Do you realize how much of your humanity you have to check at the door to feel this callous and arrogant about people abandoning everything and risking their lives so as to get a chance at a decent existence? These are human beings, who differ from you only in that they were not lucky enough to end up citizens of this nation. I guess you have no choice but to color them as these dangerous outlaws in order to not waver in your stance, because if you ever took the time to actually examine their plight, what’s left of your discarded humanity would pounce on you and tear your head off.

  • Nanotek

    “At the very least, we should demand that any illegal immigrant seeking amnesty make a full confession of all their crimes, as with any plea bargain.”

    but if the law is the law, then why not include everyone in your puritanic hubris?

    Virginia Statute § 18.2-365. Adultery defined; penalty.
    Any person, being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any person not his or her spouse shall be guilty of adultery, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor.

    Georgia Statute § 16-6-19 Adultery
    A married person commits the offense of adultery when he voluntarily has sexual intercourse with a person other than his spouse and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished as for a misdemeanor.

    • Giggles

      Since I don’t have a clue considering law how would the following play out.

      Say that you actually committed a crime such as hit-and-run, no death, but the other car requires some bodywork fixing. Would you have to confess to this event and the white collar crimes of tax dodging/SS card fraud in order to gain amnesty.

  • NRA Liberal

    It always amuses me when teapublicans claim that government regulations will never be able to stand in the way of the economic natural forces of the free market (ie, Thatcher’s TINA)….and then complain about immigration, which is just those same forces at work.

  • valkayec

    Let’s face it, everyone. Mr. Foster does not like illegal immigrants. He’s made a career prosecuting businesses that hire illegal immigrants and, I’m quite sure, given his biography, he’d send every Spanish speaking person back across the border if he could.

    However simplistic his arguments are in his column, it is true that at least part of Gingrich’s plan is ridiculously ludicrous. “The Pew Hispanic Center estimates that nearly two-thirds of the 10.2 illegal adult immigrants in the U.S. have lived here for at least 10 years — about 6.4 million in total — and almost half of them are parents of children under 18. [...] As such, his [Gingrich's] plan to have “citizen juries” decide on a case-by-base basis whether millions of illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay or go would be a massively complicated undertaking.

  • LaLupa

    I am so tired of this phony concern about the rule of law. Everyday on American highways millions break speed limits. All kinds of law breaking goes on our roads. And yet, I never hear anyone railing about the Rule of Law. And we know that thousands die each year because people do not respect traffic laws. Can anyone point to anyone dying because an undocumented student gets in state tuition in Texas? Or can anyone point to people dying because an illegal immigrant fills out a phony Social Security number and proceeds to pay payroll taxes for benefits he or she will never receive?

    And the whole idea that amnesty (however way you want to define) will undermine the Rule of Law is another phony argument. If amnesty undercuts the Rule of Law, then why did the founding fathers give the president the ability to pardon? I wonder how many people each day beg for the police not to give them tickets (amnesty) and yet go completely rabid when it comes to applying immigration laws.

    What drives illegal immigration is economics. We have created the problem of illegal immigration by failing to reform our current system to reflect our labor needs. The GOP claims to be for less regulation… unless it involves illegal immigration. Then they want to put everybody in jail. Why should government stand in the way of an employer that needs labor and somone who is willing to work once both have agreed on a wage? How can the party of free markets continue to advocate the “fixed pie” policies advocated by the FAIR crowd?

    As a Republican and a follower of this blog, I am very disappointed. I thought that New Majority, now Frum Forum, was about modernizing the GOP. Yet, when it comes to illegal immigration, this blog offers nothing more than attrition policies. How is that modernizing the GOP? How is that in line with less regulation and free markets?

    I will leave you with one final thought…. RUSSELL PEARCE WAS RECALLED.

  • Xclamation

    I’ve decided to believe that this article is a piece of satire. As such, I completely agree with Howard Foster and would like to echo his call to stop lumping every illegal immigrant in the same category as rapists and murderers.

  • Brittanicus

    Unless the former speaker’s supporters thrust him back from this plan of promising this even bigger amnesty, than the giant blanket amnesty of 1986 that was supposed to be the first and last one ever will be dwarfed in comparison. Probably the largest portion of the TEA PARTY membership; clearly recognized as the ‘American People’ of every racial persuasion, of every background, every age group and faith relationship are against a mass amnesty.

    The most recent poll finds that Republican voters have elevated Newt Gingrich to presidential front runner status. But it is hard to consider that those supporting him concur with his amnesty agenda or are even alert that Gingrich suggestion sounds like it would give U.S. jobs and residency to approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens (according to a new Pew Hispanic Center study)

    You can send an email to Gingrich by Google his site Click on the “Platform” option and make him aware of what you want him to change and how you feel about his immigration platform.

    GINGRICH, BUSH & OBAMA SEE ONLY THE OPTIONS OF DEPORTATION OR LEGALIZATION (Attrition through Enforcement isn’t in their terminology) Go to NumbersUSA to study the damage of legalizing of at least 3.5 million will cause. Of course that is if you accept the ridiculous notion that only 11.5 million migrants and immigrants have settled illegal in America. More near the mark is somewhere over 20 million population figure.

    Gingrich agrees with former President Bush and also Obama that the only major exceptions for illegal aliens are deporting them or legalizing them (choices that almost all Liberal mainstream press also insist on).

    His official immigration proposal gives no tip-off of recognizing that there is a third option — ‘ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT ‘ purging the jobs and welfare magnets for foreign nationals, thus that they will self-deport back to their homes in other nations. Hence, Gingrich is at odds with most of the other GOP candidates and most GOP Members of Congress, The Tea Party who favor the Attrition alternative.

    PROBLEM IS since brazenly advocated his legalization agenda in the debate last week, he has informed his critics by telling them to read his official “TEN STEPS TO A LEGAL NATION “and his “7-Point Plan.” Those have read this roadmap to legalization and studied both and are more alarmed than ever.
    We are in agreement with Gingrich and the Pew Center, that Gingrich is not suggesting– a blanket amnesty contrasting differently from Bush and Obama. There are two key opportunities in Gingrich’s proposals so far for limiting the harm:

    • Because Gingrich would never tolerate his amnestied illegal aliens to become U.S. citizens, they would not be able to use the CHAIN MIGRATION CATEGORIES TO BRING INTO AMERICA UNCEASING LINES OF EXTENDED FAMILY MEMBERS from their homelands.

    • The 1986 President Reagan amnesty naturalized an estimated 3 million illegal aliens. But seeing as millions more of their relatives have been brought to this country, it multiplied the harm to American workers, infrastructure and taxpayers. The cost supplied by the Heritage Foundation for a blanket amnesty, was around the $2.6 Trillion dollars for processing. During the processing hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens were admitted through the use of fraudulent documents.

    Currently, voters should not be misinformed by Gingrich’s public use of examples of illegal aliens who have been in the U.S. for 25 years. What about 20 years or even 10 years? Even 5 years is not mentioned? Nothing on his website or the ‘10 Step or 7 points’ limits that Gingrich Amnesty proposal to people who have been here 25 years or more. In fact, nothing puts any kind of time limit. To qualify for the Gingrich Amnesty right now, one need only have “deep ties” of “family, church and community?”

    Gingrich supporters should require him to at least persuade a 25-year residency requirement in his website amnesty plan. Otherwise we could end up with millions more people attracted by his clemency and rising the costs to even higher layers of schools for their children, health care, the food stamps, WIC, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC); WIC a federally-funded health and nutrition program for women, infants, and children. WIC helps families by providing checks for buying healthy supplemental foods from WICK-authorized vendors, nutrition education, and help finding healthcare and other community services. Low income housing, and even more supplementary programs, which our old, infirm and homeless are ineligible for?

    This is your money the government is spending, taking it forcibly from your taxes. Go to any emergency hospital they are packed with foreign nationals with their children. Go to any border state school that has a present enrollment of 87 percent children of illegal aliens. It costs $113 billion dollars annually now Heritage Foundation), that is going to spiral to another astronomical figure in another year, five years or ten? Then go to Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Utah and Indiana and observe the long lines of people—American residents and even more foreigners with huge numbers of babies in baby carriages and walking beside the mother, waiting to get in the Department of human services, waiting to get a charge card. God! American cannot even feed their own families or keep a roof over their head? THESE ARE ALL UNFUNDED MANDATES LEFT FOR YOU TO PAY?

    The paramount problem is, if Gingrich wins and passes his idea of an amnesty to the Congress, then on being made law millions more will try and reach this nation? One the clarion call goes out from word of mouth, across the airwaves—unfettered numbers will be encouraged to come?

    Sovereignty minded Americans should contact the Ways and Means Committee accountable for bringing E-VERIFY ‘The Legal Workforce Act’, bill H.R.2885 to the House floor in Congress. Only the American voter or legal resident has a voice in this urgent matter, which will decrease large numbers of jobs procured by the 8.2 illegal workers, which is estimated to self-deport. The number to call for the Washington politicians is 202-224-3121. The legislators need to pay attention to the People, instead of misleading us anymore. If you have further questions read about the widespread corruption in the federal and state governments at ‘Judicial Watch.’ Be attentive that the TEA PARTY does not agree with any kind of Amnesty, Dream Acts or Sanctuary cities.

    • smajor

      People come here for a reason- they want work and we have jobs that are not being filled. The fact is, the economic forces driving immigration from Central and Southern America are really really powerful, and no amount of ranting and raving (with the occasional use of caps lock for extra emphasis) can change that. We can decide to be xenophobes and throw billions at a problem that only exists because we decide it does (they’re only illegal immigrants because we decide to make them illegal) or we can come to grips with reality and accept that as long as our neighbor is in extreme poverty, we’ll have this problem.

      Think about the hypocrisy of it all: NAFTA ensures that our businesses can freely go South to take advantage of cheaper labor, but it prevents labor from moving North to take advantage of higher wages.

      By the way, why don’t we ever talk about legalizing marijuana (to start with) when the immigration issue is raised? Mexico has a huge drug cartel problem which depresses its economy, contributing to migration tot he United States. American drug use funds most of it. Why don’t all the conservatives out there show some consistency and support people’s rights to not be treated like children by their government. If I can own an assault rifle, I should also be able to smoke a joint.

      Final thought- I’m a 3rd generation French-Canadian whose grandparents worked in cotton mills. My grandparents have friends that never learned English. They’re all very religious and really thrifty. Sound familiar? Me and my 3 brothers are educated, law abiding, contributing members of society, as is the rest of my family. We have slight accents and talk about our history to people without ever being judged. If we had Spanish accents and darker skin, I don’t think we’d get the same treatment.

  • jorae

    The opposite of Keynesian economics is Neoclassical economics.

    Neoclassical Economics holds that free markets would automatically provide full employment, as long as workers were flexible in their wage demands… also know as…Classical economists and Austrian economists.

    In Keynesian economics, the proven theory to increase employment and improve a depression…holds increased government spending which raises aggregate demand and increases consumption, which in turn leads to increased production

    Keynesian economists was proven with the Great Depression with government spending programs during World War II.

    … long as workers were flexible in their wage demands…Neoclassical

    Newtie…That is exactly why you and the Republican Party are behind illegals.

    • smajor

      While I always appreciate when people try to understand the economic theory out there, I feel that I should point out that Keynesian economics is not the opposite of Neoclassical economics.

      Google “neoclassical synthesis”.

      Keynes theorized on macro economic issues. Neoclassical economics is about supply, demand, and price as a result of the interactions of utility maximizing agents. They can both live together quite happily. In fact, one could have a neoclassical type model with Keynesian sticky prices, but signaling problems that left the government in a very Austrian world (unable to make good decisions due to information and complexity).

  • Bebe99

    immigration is probably one of those issues that most Americans can agree merits immediate reform, but politicians beholden to their big Agra donors will never allow it. And politicians like Newt then offer some ‘compassionate’ and completely unworkable solution to allow the current system to continue or expand. This is a great way to stall any progress on a guest worker program, which would be a real solution, not the fantasy of millions of illegals having their day in court.

  • midcon

    Brittanicus // Dec 2, 2011 at 9:06 pm “Sovereignty minded Americans should contact the Ways and Means Committee accountable for bringing E-VERIFY ‘The Legal Workforce Act’, bill H.R.2885 to the House floor in Congress. ”

    And yet, Rick Perry refuses to require the grand state of Texas to use E-Verify. Wanna rationalize that one Brittanicus?

  • Graychin

    I was going to make my modest attempt to rip this “pedantic idiocy” to shreds, but I see that I’m late to the party. There is nothing I can say that other commenters haven’t already said better.

    The windy article reminds me of the morons who post comments at my local newspaper’s website on the subject of less-than-zero tolerance for illegal immigration. The depth of their analysis of the question is: “What part of ILLEGAL don’t you understand?” Their analysis is much more virtuous for its succinctness and brevity than Mr. Foster’s.

  • baw1064

    Hey, remember those suburban, non-unionized movers you wanted to use to move your law office, only to get all pissy about your new building’s requirement for unionized movers, and how it cost you $500?

    You don’t suppose any of their employees might be undocumented, do you?

    Don’t get all self-righteous about illegal aliens while complaining that menial labor is too darned expensive.

    • Graychin


      I had forgotten that it was Foster who ranted/whined over the cost of getting Americans to do his moving for him.

      Words fail me.

  • hisgirlfriday

    Where’s the FF liveblog for this Huckabee forum? Grrrr. Going to threadjack to drop my thoughts on it here.

    Caught it midway through but the final comments are so telling.

    Mitt Romney – namechecks an opinion of a New York Times columnist

    Rick Perry – namechecks a book by a pastor

    Ron Paul – thinks it’s 1832 and he’s John Calhoun

    Newt Gingrich – thinks it’s 1860 and he’s Abraham Lincoln

    Santorum – sucks up to Huckabee

  • Gingrich Must Know Illegals Break the Law - FrumForum | Immigration, C | Neera Bahl & Associaltes, LLC

    [...] Gingrich Must Know Illegals Break the LawFrumForumGingrich voted for the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) in 1986 which requires employers and employees to sign a verification form at the time of hire indicating the employee is authorized for employment. Only US citizens and certain classes …Editorial: Gingrich plan on immigration hardly humaneSacramento BeeImmigration DailyILW.comIllegal immigration: Are Obama deportations truly aimed at 'criminals'?Christian Science MonitorPolitico -Columbia Basin Herald -Fox Newsall 1,511 news articles » [...]

  • SFTor1

    I thought Mr. Foster was a brand new douchebag to this forum, but apparently not.

    One would imagine that a conservative has a grasp of history. Otherwise, how can you be a conservative?

    If one did have such a grasp of history one would know that migration is an inescapable phenomenon of regional economic inequality. It is as old as history. People move when they are forced to. No law will ever change that. People will ford rivers, navigate oceans, climb mountains, and cross deserts to improve their lot.

    Howard, remember the Berlin Wall? You could be shot for crossing it without permission, according to the laws governing that border. Yet people did. They wanted freedom and opportunity, and were more than willing to bear the risks.

    So also with the illegals in this country. Except in this case it is the U.S. that says “we don’t want you here, unless of course you take a job at Tyson or Perdue, which have openly advertised their job openings in Mexico to acquire cheap labor, or until we have a drop in unemployment, in which case we will need your able bodies, or unless you are really good at picking lettuce, and until then we will desist from our scheduled law-and-order chant until further notice. Wait, how does that go again?”

  • jakester

    I guess if they go to church, especially the one Gingrich converted to, they should get a pass. Why not let all the Hispanic Catholics emigrate here en masse, a mega Mariel boatlift? That way they can do to us what they managed to do to their countries.

  • moderateOhiovoter

    its called ITIN illegal pay into the system and dont get the benefits

  • Ex Cathedra

    Jaywalking also is illegal.

    But if we want to “solve” this “problem” then we must address its causes, not its symptoms. These undocumented workers are because American business has invited them here. They are invitees. They will continue to immigrate as long as American business hires them.

    Note that when the economy slowed in 2008 as we entered the Great Recession, immigration to the US dropped, and for one reason: a lack of jobs. Can you put 2 and 2 together?

    Only employer sanctions will stop this. Do you have the guts to impose draconian sanctions on businesses that hire undocumented workers? Do you support going after the cause? Or do you insist on going after the symptoms?

    But as for amnesty, we have a long history of amnesties. We gave amnesty to the Confederate traitors after the War of Southern Treason. And those scum promptly imposed Jim Crow on the freed slaves, and even reinstated slavery on a de facto basis. They should have been shot for treason. We now give instant amnesty to Cubans. Sorry, but Mexicans are just as deserving of amnesty as were those who waged war on our Republic.

    Hire Them And They Will Come. It’s really that simple.