3rdnlng Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) http://www.gopusa.com/news/2014/01/03/ca-supreme-court-upholds-law-licenses-for-illegal-aliens/?subscriber=1 SAN JOSE, Calif. _ Citing a new state law allowing illegal immigrants to get their law licenses, the California Supreme Court on Thursday paved the way for a Chico man to fulfill his dream of becoming an attorney despite his not being a U.S. citizen. In a unanimous ruling, the state Supreme Court determined there is no reason to block Sergio Garcia's bid for a California law license, now that a new law permits the state's high court to give such licenses to immigrants who are not yet citizens. State legislators, backed by Gov. Jerry Brown, pushed the legislation last fall as Garcia's case was unfolding in the Supreme Court, which has a final say on licensing California attorneys. During arguments in the fall, the justices appeared unlikely to back Garcia because federal immigration law precludes giving a law license to illegal immigrants. But the court invited the Legislature to fix the problem if it wanted to solve the conflict with federal laws. In Thursday's ruling, the Supreme Court concluded that there is no longer reason to deny a law license to Garcia, or other illegal immigrants in his position. "We conclude there is no state law or state public policy that would justify precluding undocumented immigrants, as a class from obtaining a law license in California," Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote for the court. Edited January 3, 2014 by 3rdnlng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 !@#$ me, California is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 !@#$ me, California is stupid. It's not stupid. It's progressive. It passed stupid a long time ago. Governor Brown intends to make this a sanctuary state, and it should take hold any day now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 You don't have to be a citizen to practice law. He could be a Mexican citizen living in Mexico, wanting to practice law (say, immigration law) in California, and he's not only eligible to but REQUIRED to get a CA law license. Nor is there any law barring felons - say, those that violate immigration law - from getting a license to practice law. Seems awfully stupid...but after thinking about it, it's at least consistent with the law and regulations of any state bar I know of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 !@#$ me, California is stupid. Illegal Alien Lawyer Ineligible for Jury Duty Logic? We don’t need no stinkin’ logic. So an illegal alien has been granted a license to practice law by the Supreme Court of California. He would be ineligible to sit on a jury he argues in front of. American citizen lawyers can’t get out of jury duty because they are lawyers. I think the underlying issue is that lawyers are expected to uphold the laws of the jurisdictions in which they practice, whether or not they live there. Perhaps they even take an oath to that effect. At best, the illegal could say that he did not knowingly violate any law, but I don't think that's credible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 I think the underlying issue is that lawyers are expected to uphold the laws of the jurisdictions in which they practice, whether or not they live there. No, they're not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 You don't have to be a citizen to practice law. He could be a Mexican citizen living in Mexico, wanting to practice law (say, immigration law) in California, and he's not only eligible to but REQUIRED to get a CA law license. Nor is there any law barring felons - say, those that violate immigration law - from getting a license to practice law. Seems awfully stupid...but after thinking about it, it's at least consistent with the law and regulations of any state bar I know of. Jesus Christ! You gotta spoil everything! :wallbash: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 (edited) Practicing Law While Illegal Following up on yesterday’s post on the admission of an illegal alien to the practice of law in California, today’s Times story had a few interesting aspects. The newly minted lawyer, Sergio Garcia (no, not the golfer from Spain) had this to say: “I can finally fulfill my dream and also leave behind a legacy so that an undocumented student 20 or 30 years from now will take it for granted that they can be an attorney.” This confirms the fear that this case is not about his individual situation nor merely a short-term expedient until Congress (advocates hope) passes an amnesty; it’s part of a strategy to permanently eliminate the distinction between legal and illegal immigration. What’s more, the court seemed to suggest that being an illegal alien is an identity which may not result in discrimination. From the Times: The court went on to suggest that immigration status should not be considered any differently from, say, race or religion. “We conclude that the fact that an undocumented immigrant’s presence in this country violates federal statutes is not itself a sufficient or persuasive basis for denying undocumented immigrants, as a class, admission to the state bar,” Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote in her opinion. “The fact that an undocumented immigrant is present in the United States without lawful authorization does not itself involve moral turpitude or demonstrate moral unfitness so as to justify exclusion from the state bar.” Immigration expansionists sometimes complain when we say they support open borders. Though their disclaimers are unconvincing, most of them (other than the Wall Street Journal) at least deny it, saying “Of course a nation has the right to control its borders, but . . .” Yet in this case (as with driver’s licenses, deportation, and other matters) the goal of the other side is indeed to prevent the federal government from being able to limit immigration at all. They’ll concede security or criminal concerns (though their approach even there is frivolous) but the explicit agenda of the Chamber of Commerce/La Raza/Cato Institute/ACLU/Haley Barbour/Chuck Schumer/Grover Norquist/Nancy Pelosi axis really is unlimited immigration. Rather than arguing over fences and whatnot, this is where the immigration debate should be focused: Unlimited immigration — yes or no? Your answer to that question answers most other questions regarding the issue. Edited January 4, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 You don't have to be a citizen to practice law. He could be a Mexican citizen living in Mexico, wanting to practice law (say, immigration law) in California, and he's not only eligible to but REQUIRED to get a CA law license. Nor is there any law barring felons - say, those that violate immigration law - from getting a license to practice law. Seems awfully stupid...but after thinking about it, it's at least consistent with the law and regulations of any state bar I know of. There's just that little detail that he has violated Federal law just being in the country and has no right to work in the United States. Give him the license and show him the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Better call Saul! He's a criminal-lawyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Nor is there any law barring felons - say, those that violate immigration law - from getting a license to practice law. Of course not. Why would lawyers allow themselves to be unable to make a living in their profession, just because they were convicted of a felony? That's for everybody else. And we wonder why the propensity of the above sentence to represent the prevailing attitude in DC, correlates so nicely with the number of lawyers there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbillievable Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 They should just make California a dual-nationality state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts