Since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, immigration control and national homeland security have been issues of concern for both the national government and private citizens. In the wake of the attacks, a lot of articles were written about what the appropriate response should be to prevent another attack. In 2004, Mark Krikorian wrote an article for the Providence Journal entitled “Safety through Immigration Control” in which he contends that the only means to keep America safe from a follow-up attack is to strengthen and enforce immigration law to prevent terrorists from being able to enter the country. Edwidge Danticat, writing for The Nation in 2005, provides a juxtaposition to Krikorian’s stance in her essay “Not Your Homeland”, in which she describes her witnessing of the inhumane conditions many immigrants are forced to endure in the name of increased security to protect the country. She questions whether the added protections are worth the human cost we are paying by treating immigrants and refugees as guilty until proven innocent. At the crossroads of these two perspectives lies the question: what is the proper balance between national security and the humane treatment of immigrants?
As we try to answer the proposed question we will look at racial profiling from both sides. A country must take certain measures to ensure the safety of its people. Some argue that in order to protect citizens from acts of terrorism, various individual freedoms must be sacrificed. Others feel that if we as a nation volunteer to relinquish our freedoms, the federal government will proceed to shred additional individual rights.
“A police sergeant and three officers in the Connecticut city of East Haven were arrested on January 25 on federal charges of conspiracy, deprivation of rights and obstruction of justice. The case is in connection with a campaign of harassment and brutality directed against the town’s growing Latino population”, (Peter Daniels). Peter Daniels went into depth about how the police of Connecticut were abusing their power completely. More specifically, a police sergeant and three officers were brutalizing the Latino community, and were making unnecessary searches and arrests. Furthermore, the sergeant and three officers were going around the community saying racist comments. For example, the sergeant and three officers told some Hispanics they didn’t want their kind here in the United States. The police presented this unprofessional behavior at a convenient store, owned by Hispanics. According to Peter Daniels, the reason the police and sergeant was treating the Hispanics poorly, because they are trying to drive the Hispanics out of the United States. They want to drive them out, because they were being
You are in your third year as an accountant with McCarver-Lynn Industries, a multidivisional company involved manufacturing, marketing, and sales of surgical prosthetic devices. After the fiscal year-end, you are working with the controller of the firm to prepare supplemental business segment disclosures. Yesterday you presented her with the following summary information:
Many business owners must examine what is at risk when they communicate sensitive data over email. The first thing is to make sure that a good virus protection software is install and updated on everyone computer place. Second it is good that all key departments within the organization, such as legal IT and H, understand the policies; require them to sign off on the email filtering, retention, retrieval and analysis policies (Small Business Computing Staff, 2011).
1. If you were representing the Company in this case, what argument (facts and reasons) could you make that the confidentiality agreement had a legitimate business purpose and was applied appropriately to Martinez?
As an American citizen, we are guaranteed many freedoms through the Constitution. The first amendment in the Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” (US Const. amend. I). This means that all people have the right to assemble a protest peacefully, and Congress in unable to prevent this practice. However, in recent years this has become controversial because many residents question how much protesters can get away with before a demonstration becomes turbulent. Because of this question, there have been many cases in which law enforcement has become involved in rallies. This essay will explore when law enforcement became involved in rallies, and when they did not.
The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 has a mandatory detention provision in 8 U.S.C 1226(c). The issue this pathfinder explores is whether §1226 (c) requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to detain a noncitizen offender who committed a qualifying offense “when the alien is released” from custody immediately or any time after they are released from criminal custody. The language of the statute is ambiguous because it does not provide a time frame for when an alien can be detained after being released from custody for a qualifying offense. The statute is not clear whether “when released” can mean a couple of days after release from custody or years after release.
This book is contains information on how detainees are treated in prisons created by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service. Some of the prisoners did have felonious conviction and were to be deported. Nevertheless, many of the individuals interrogated were immigrants looking for refuge and were being held in prisons as if they were also offenders. The obnoxious management described in this source anticipates demonstrating how non-citizens have been assumed to be lawbreakers.
Across the nation and world assisted suicide is an issue that has been gaining attention for several years. With famous cases such as Jack Kevorkian it has become a household term and everyone has an opinion. There are strong cases on both sides, but the bottom line is while it may sound good for the present, it is not for the future. Assisted Suicide should not be legalized in Alabama as the negative outcomes far exceed the positive outcomes in the areas of impact on society, politics and medical education
In December of 2013, I was told that I was not considered for the full-time temporary faculty position in political science on South Campus by Dr. Sonia Nieves because I was not able to teach international relations even though I have graduate level coursework in international relations and Political Science degrees do not specify a focus. I later found out that, this requirement was false and inconsistent with Broward College’s Faculty Credentialing Manual and that Dr. Nieves hired an adjunct faculty member from another campus who had the same degree as me. This left me in the middle of December with no classes for the upcoming spring term despite my ability and record to fill my classes and outstanding reviews by students and supervisors. Dr. Neves also mentioned to me, on several occasions, that it was always a major scheduling “hassle” to be forced to find a downstairs classroom in order to accommodate my ADA needs.