What do you think of this?
Answer:
How can you determine wages for years of work that he "would" have performed, for a portion of the wages that he "could" have earned, for a job that the employee "might" have held? When it is against our laws for him to be here in the first place. Why not fine the illegal and for breaking the law?
But the real question here is .. would it have gone this far if it hadn't been for the "labor law" issue and the company breaking a Federal law?
Illegal immigrants "rights" which is a contradiction in it's self...it's ludicrous. If we quit coddling them maybe they will go away.
This case didn't make me feel 'warm and fuzzy".
Every employer should have one.
it is a case...
They have a case
Yes all religions are money s[pinning business. It fetches revenue and fills the stomach of the greedy but millions go hungry every day!
What I think of this is: We need a complete revision of how our courts interpret and apply law.
These are all excerpts from the opinion (interspersed with "Read:" comments):
Read: Phrases in CAPS prove, once again, that courts want ONE THING…MOOOORRRE POWER!!! Read carefully.
*****
“This case exemplifies the principle that THE BOARD'S DISCRETION to select and fashion remedies for violations of the NLRA, though generally broad [case cited] IS NOT UNLIMITED.”
Read: Unlimited? Where did the NLRB’s imply any assumption that their power was unlimited?
*****
“Although THE BOARD HAD ARGUED that the employees' conduct did not in fact violate the federal mutiny statute, WE REJECTED THIS VIEW, finding the Board's interpretation of a statute SO FAR REMOVED FROM ITS EXPERTISE ENTITLED NO DEFERENCE FROM THIS COURT.”
Read: Whatever the board says, court will reject. MOOORRRE POWER!!!!
*****
“WE HAVE accordingly NEVER DEFERRED TO THE BOARD'S REMEDIAL PREFERENCES where such preferences potentially trench upon federal statutes and policies unrelated to the NLRA. Thus, WE HAVE PRECLUDED THE BOARD FROM ENFORCING ORDERS found in …”
Read: Notice the emotional phraseology – “trench upon?” Write a screenplay, for God’s sake!… And did we notice: “precluded them from enforcing orders” - MOOOOORRRE POWER!!!
I still say we need a Constitutional Amendment granting us the power to review such decisions as groups of citizens, selected at random, following existing law but with the option of recommending revisions to larger such groups (legislation by jury) to correct the wording of laws. And both houses of the Congress would need a 98% majority to override us. Below is a good example why:
________
The choice morsels below show how easily law, as intended, can be rendered useless by ONE judge or court of nine. Who in Washington is REALLY being bought off by unethical corporations and special interests?
*****
“We affirmed that …THE IMMIGRATION LAWS "as presently written" EXPRESSED ONLY A " `PERIPHERAL CONCERN' " with the employment of illegal aliens.”
…and…
"For whatever reason," Congress…
…had NOT "made it a separate criminal offense"
…for EMPLOYERS TO HIRE an illegal alien,
…or for an illegal alien
…"TO ACCEPT EMPLOYMENT AFTER ENTERING THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY."
Read: Despite every effort of the Constitution to establish a sovereign state for its citizens, despite the clearly written intentions behind the wording of the 14th Amendment to protect citizens (not aliens), despite everything in our favor, the COURTS want MOOOORRRE POWER!!!
Justice? What Justice? We’re the COURTS!!!
The best power money can buy.
qwerty
The immigration information post by website user , MyTend.com not guarantee correctness